Columbia  ©nitter^ftp 

THE  LIBRARIES 


PEOTESTANT    THOUGHT 
BEFORE    KANT 


STUDIES   IN  THEOLOGY 

12mo,  cloth.    75  cents  net  per  vol. 


NOW  READY 
A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament 

By  Arthur  Samuel  Peake,  D.D. 
Faith  and  its  Psychology 

By  the  Rev.  William  R.  Inge,  D.D. 
Philosophy  and  Religion 

By  the  Rev.  Hastings  Rashdall,  D.Litt.   (Oxon), 
D.C.L.  (Durham),  F.B.A. 

Revelation  and  Inspiration 

By  the  Rev.  James  Orr,  D.D. 
Christianity  and  Social  Questions 

By  the  Rev.  William  Cunningham,  D.D.,  F.B.A. 
Christian  Thought  to  the  Reformation 

By  Herbert  B.  Workman,  D.Litt. 
Protestant  Thought  Before  Kant 

By  A.  C.  McGiFFERT,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 

An  Outline  of  the  History  of  Christian  Thought 
Since  Kant 

By  Edward  Caldwell  Moore,  D.D. 

The  Christian  Hope:  A  Study  in  the  Doctrine  of 
Immortality 

By  WiLLLi^M  ADAiis  Brown,  Ph.D.,  D.D, 
The  Theology  of  the  QospcSs 

By  the  Rev.  James  Moffatt,  D.D.,  D.Litt. 
The  Text  and  Canon  of  the  New  Testament 

By  Alexander  Souter,  D.Litt. 

A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament 

By  the  Rev.  George  Buchanan  Gray,  D.D.,  D.Litt. 

A  Handbook  of  Christian  Apologetics 

By  Alfred  Ernest  Garvie,  M.A.,  D.D. 

Gospel  Origins 

By  the  Rev.  William  West  Holdsworth,  M.A. 

The  Religious  Ideas  of  the  Old  Testament 

By  H.  Wheeler  Robinson,  M.A. 

Christianity  and  Sin 

By  Robert  Mackintosh,  D.D. 

Christianity  and  Ethics 

By  Archibald  B.  D.  Alexander,  M.A.,  D.D. 


PROTESTANT   THOUGHT 
BEFORE    KANT 


BY 


ARTHUR    CUSHMAN    M'GIFFERT 

PROFESSOR  OF   CHURCH    HISTORY    IN    UNION    THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY 

NEW  YORK 


MEW  YORK 
CTIA^XES  SCRIRMER'S  SONS 

^9^5 


c^  3 


TO 

ADOLF    HARNACK 

TEACHER    AND    FRIEND 
IN   GRATITUDE   AND    AFFECTION 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION 
TO  THE  SERIES 

Man  has  no  deeper  or  wider  interest  than  theology ; 
none  deeper,  for  however  much  he  may  change,  he 
never  loses  his  love  of  the  many  questions  it  covers ; 
and  none  wider,  for  under  whatever  law  he  may  live 
he  never  escapes  from  its  spacious  shade ;  nor  does 
he  ever  find  that  it  speaks  to  him  in  vain  or  uses  a 
voice  that  fails  to  reach  him.  Once  the  present 
writer  was  talking  with  a  friend  who  has  equal  fame 
as  a  statesman  and  a  man  of  letters,  and  he  said, 
"Every  day  I  live,  Politics,  which  are  affairs  of 
Man  and  Time,  interest  me  less,  while  Theology, 
which  is  an  affair  of  God  and  Eternity,  interests  me 
more."  As  with  him,  so  with  many,  though  the  many 
feel  that  their  interest  is  in  theology  and  not  in  dogma. 
Dogma,  they  know,  is  but  a  series  of  resolutions 
framed  by  a  council  or  parliament,  which  they  do 
not  respect  any  the  more  because  the  parliament  was 
composed  of  ecclesiastically-minded  persons  ;  while  the 
theology  which  so  interests  them  is  a  discourse  touching 
God,  though  the  Being  so  named  is  the  God  man  con- 
ceived as  not  only  related  to  himself  and  his  world  but 
also  as  rising  ever  higher  with  the  notions  of  the  self  and 
♦;he  world.  Wise  books,  not  in  dogma  but  in  theology, 
may  therefore  be  described  as  the  supreme  need  of  our 


GENERAL  LNTRODUCTION 

day,  for  only  such  can  save  us  from  much  fanaticism 
and  secure  us  in  the  full  possession  of  a  sober  and 
sane  reason. 

Theology  is  less  a  single  science  than  an  ency- 
clopifidia  of  sciences ;  indeed  all  the  sciences  which 
have  to  do  with  man  have  a  better  right  to  be  called 
theological  than  anthropological,  though  the  man  it 
studies  is  not  simply  an  individual  but  a  race.  Its 
way  of  viewing  man  is  indeed  characteristic;  from 
this  have  come  some  of  its  brighter  ideals  and  some  of 
its  darkest  dreams.  The  ideals  are  all  either  ethical 
or  social,  and  would  make  of  earth  a  heaven,  creating 
fraternity  amongst  men  and  forming  all  states  into  a 
goodly  sisterhood  ;  the  dreams  may  be  represented  by 
doctrines  which  concern  sin  on  the  one  side  and  the 
will  of  God  on  the  other.  But  even  this  will  cannot 
make  sin  luminous,  for  were  it  made  radiant  with 
grace,  it  would  cease  to  be  sin. 

These  books  then, — which  have  all  to  be  written  by 
men  who  have  lived  in  the  full  blaze  of  modern  light, 
— thougii  without  having  either  their  eyes  burned 
out  or  their  souls  scorched  into  insensibility, — are  in- 
tended to  present  God  in  relation  to  Man  and  Man 
in  relation  to  God.  It  is  intended  that  they  begin,  not 
in  date  of  publication,  but  in  order  of  thought,  with  A 
Theological  Encyclopaedia  which  shall  show  the  circle 
^of  sciences  co-ordinated  under  the  term  Theology, 
though  all  will  be  viewed  as  related  to  its  central  or 
main  idea.  This  relation  of  God  to  human  know- 
ledge will  then  be  looked  at  through  mind  as  a  com- 
munion of  Deity  with  humanity,  or  God  in  fellowship 
with  concrete  man.     On  this  basis  the  idea  of  Revela- 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION 

feion  will  be  dealt  with.  Then,  so  far  as  history  and 
philology  are  concerned,  the  two  Sacred  Books,  which 
are  here  most  significant,  will  be  viewed  as  the  scholar, 
who  is  also  a  divine,  views  them ;  in  other  words, 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  regarded  as  human 
documents,  will  be  criticised  as  a  literature  which 
expresses  relations  to  both  the  present  and  the  future  ; 
that  is,  to  the  men  and  races  who  made  the  books, 
&8  well  as  to  the  races  and  men  the  books  made. 
The  Bible  will  thus  be  studied  in  the  Semitic  family 
which  gave  it  being,  and  also  in  the  Indo-European 
families  which  gave  to  it  the  quality  of  the  life  to 
which  they  have  attained.  But  Theology  has  to  do 
with  more  than  sacred  literature;  it  has  also  to  do 
with  the  thoughts  and  life  its  history  occasioned. 
Therefore  the  Church  has  to  be  studied  and  presented 
as  an  institution  which  God  founded  and  man  ad- 
ministers. But  it  is  possible  to  know  this  Church 
only  through  the  thoughts  it  thinks,  the  doctrines 
it  holds,  the  characters  and  the  persons  it  forms,  the 
people  who  are  its  saints  and  embody  its  ideals  of 
sanctity,  the  acts  it  does,  which  are  its  sacraments,  and 
the  laws  it  follows  and  enforces  which  are  its  polity, 
and  the  young  it  educates  and  the  nations  it  directs 
and  controls.  These  are  the  points  to  be  presented  in 
the  volumes  which  follow,  which  are  all  to  be  occupied 
with  theology  or  the  knowledge  of  God  and  His 
ways. 

A.  M.F. 


PREFACE 

In  accordance  with  the  plan  of  the  series  the  present 
volume  deals  with  religious  thought  alone  and  not  with 
philosophy,  science,  or  ethics.  Even  this  narrow  field  is 
over  large  for  treatment  in  so  small  a  compass,  and  in 
order  to  avoid  making  the  book  a  mere  encyclopasdia  of 
names  and  opinions  it  has  been  found  necessary  to  omit 
a  vast  mass  of  material,  some  of  it  perhaps  as  important, 
in  the  judgment  of  many  doubtless  more  important,  than 
much  that  is  included,  but  it  is  hoped  that  enough  has 
been  given  to  make  the  general  course  of  development 
plain,  however  summary  and  inadequate  the  treatment 
of  many  topics. 

The  relatively  large  space  devoted  to  rationalism  is 
justified  by  the  contrast  between  it  and  all  that  went 
before.  Until  the  eighteenth  century  Protestantism  moved 
largely  within  the  confines  of  an  ancient  past ;  only  with 
the  spread  of  rationalism  did  it  enter  what  was  then  the 
modem  world  of  thought.  It  has  therefore  seemed 
imperative  for  the  better  understanding  both  of  the 
older  and  the  newer  Protestantism  to  construct  the  final 
chapter  on  a  somewhat  different  scale  from  most  of 
the  others. 

There   is  an  unfortunate  lack  of  works  covering   the 

h 


PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT 

entire  history  of  Protestant  thought;  aside  from  the 
old  one  of  Dorner  there  is  none  of  any  great  value. 
Particular  topics  have  been  treated  in  numberless  books 
and  articles,  and  a  few  of  the  most  useful  Mid  compre- 
hensive of  the  former  are  mentioned  in  th'  brief  biblio 
graphy  at  the  close  of  this  volume- 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I 

PAoa 

Introductiow,  •.•••«! 

i.  medieval  christianity,        •  •  •  •  1 

ii.  the  eve  of  the  reformation,         *  •  •         9 

CHAPTER  II 
Martin  Luther,         ...•••        20 

I.  the  new  IN  Luther's  thought,       .  ,  ,        20 

II,  the  old  in  Luther's  thought,        .  .  ,46 

CHAPTER  III 
Huldreich  Zwingli,  .«••••        61 

CHAPTER  IV 
Philip  Melanchthon,  .  •  •  •  >       71 

CHAPTER  V 
John  Calviit,  .••••••        81 


PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT 

CHAPTER  VI 

The  Radical  Sects,   .  .  ,  ,  . 

i.  the  anabaptists,        •  •  •  • 

II.   THB  SOCINIANS,  .  •  .  • 


PAOI 

100 
100 
107 


CHAPTER  VII 

The  English  Reformation,  .  • 


119 


CHAPTER  VIII 
Protestant  Scholasticism,  .  • 


141 


CHAPTER  IX 
V       Pietism,  .  .  •  • 

I.    GERMAN    pietism, 
n.    ENGLISH    evangelicalism, 
III.    THE   NEW    ENGLAND    IHEOLOGT, 


155 
155 
162 
176 


CHAPTER  X 

Rationalism,    . 

.      186 

L    IN    ENGLAND, 

.      189 

II.    IN    FRANCE, 

.       243 

III.    IN    GERMANY, 

.      247 

IV.    IN   AMERICA,      , 

.      251 

PROTESTANT    THOUGHT 
BEFORE    KANT 


PROTESTANT    THOUGHT 
BEFORE    KANT 

CHAPTER  I 

INTRODUCTION 

I.  Mediceval  Christianity, 

The  theological  system  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  in  its 
controlling  principles  as  old  as  the  Apostle  Paul.  He  was 
led  by  his  own  experience  to  draw  a  sharp  distinction 
between  the  fleshly  man,  who  is  essentially  corrupt,  and 
the  spiritual  man,  who  is  essentially  holy.  The  one  is 
natural,  the  other  supernatural.  The  one  is  doomed  to 
destruction,  the  other  is  an  heir  of  eternal  life.  The 
spiritual  man  does  not  come  from  the  natural  by  a  process 
of  development  and  growth,  but  is  a  new  creature  born 
directly  from  above.  Wherever  Paul  may  have  got  the 
suggestion  which  led  him  to  interpret  his  experience  in 
this  way,  his  low  estimate  of  man  and  his  contrast  be- 
tween flesh  and  spirit,  revealed  the  ultimate  influence  of 
oriental  dualism  which  was  profoundly  affecting  the 
Hellenistic  world  of  the  day.  A  sense  of  moral  evil,  a 
conviction  of  human  corruption  and  helplessness,  and  a 
recognition  of  the  worthlessness  of  the  present  world, 
were  becoming  more  and  more  common,  and  men 
everywhere  were  looking  for  aid  and  comfort  to  super- 
natural powers  of  one  kind  and  another.  The  later 
Platonism,  from  which  the  theological  thinking  of  the 
great  fathers  chiefly  drew  its  sustenance,  was  completely 

A 


2  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

under  tlie  sway  of  this  spirit.  Justin  Martyr,  Clement 
j  of  Alexandria,  and  some  other  Fathers  felt  other  inJ3u- 
*'  ences  and  emphasised  the  moral  ability  of  the  natural 
man.  But  their  optimistic  view  was  rare  in  the  early 
Church,  and  lasted  but  a  httle  while.  The  dominant 
temper  of  the  age  was  against  it,  and  in  the  Epistles  of 
Paul  that  temper  found  support.  Even  where  the  esti- 
mate of  human  nature  was  least  sombre,  it  was  still 
such  as  to  make  supernatural  aid  essential  to  its  better- 
ment. No  man  can  enjoy  the  vision  of  God  and  eternal 
life  unless  he  be  born  from  above,  unless  he  be 
recreated  by  divine  power.  Upon  this  need  the  his- 
toric Catholic  system,  both  of  east  and  west,  was  built, 
and  in  all  its  essential  features  it  was  complete  before 
Augustine  came  upon  the  scene.  His  extreme  doctrine 
of  human  bondage  and  unconditional  predestination 
never  found  acceptance  in  the  east,  and  was  unpopular 
even  in  the  west,  but  the  old  conviction  of  man's  need 
still  prevailed,  and  at  the  second  Council  of  Orange  in 
529,  it  was  declared  in  the  most  unequivocal  terms  that 
no  one  can  take  even  the  first  step  toward  the  good  until 
he  has  received  divine  grace.  This  remained  throughout 
the  Middle  Ages  not  only  the  official  doctrine  but  also 
the  popular  belief  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Emphasis 
might  be  laid  upon  human  merit,  and  upon  man's  ability 
to  earn  reward  by  making  the  right  use  of  grace,  but 
without  it  he  could  do  nothing  at  all.  Unless  regene- 
rated, he  was  doomed  to  destruction,  and  his  most 
strenuous  efforts  could  not  avail. 

In  the  canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  whose  first 
doctrinal  decree  had  to  do  with  original  sin,  it  is  said  : 
*  If  any  one  saith  that  divine  grace  is  given  through  Jesus 
Christ  only  for  this  that  man  may  be  able  more  easily 
to  live  justly  and  to  merit  eternal  life,  as  if  by  free  will 
without  grace  he  were  able  to  do  both,  though  hardly 
indeed,    and    with    difficulty ;     let    him     be   anathema.* 


I.]  INTRODUCTION  3 

(Session  6,  Canon  2.)  'If  any  one  saith  that  without 
the  prevenient  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  without 
His  help  man  can  beheve,  hope,  love,  or  be  penitent  as 
he  ought,  so  that  the  grace  of  justification  may  be  be- 
stowed upon  him  ;  let  him  be  anathema.'  {Ibid.,  Canon  3.) 

The  mediaeval  view  involved,  not  simply  the  conviction 
that  the  natural  man  is  corrupt  and  depraved,  but  that 
he  is  fallen.  Originally  created  holy,  he  lapsed  from  his 
high  estate,  and  cannot  raise  himself  again  without  super- 
natural aid.  The  idea  was  the  exact  opposite  of  modern 
evolutionary  notions.  Man  did  not  begin  on  a  low  plane 
and  gradually  ascend,  but  on  a  high  plane,  from  which 
he  abruptly  fell.  Having  fallen  and  transgressed  the 
divine  law,  he  is  doomed  to  eternal  punishment.  God  is 
the  great  Judge  and  Avenger,  a  righteous  Being  who 
allows  no  sin  to  go  unpunished ;  but  He  is  also  merciful, 
and  has  provided  for  guilty  men  a  means  of  escape  from 
the  consequences  of  their  wickedness.  The  supreme 
need  is  salvation  from  the  impending  doom,  and  this 
God  has  provided  in  Christianity.  In  it  is  found  the 
promise  of  divine  grace  adequate  to  human  wants. 

If  the  mediaeval  view  of  man's  corruption  and  in- 
ability was  due  to  Paul,  the  mediaeval  view  of  human 
merit  had  another  root.  Paul  had  denied  all  merit  to 
man,  and  made  salvation  a  pure  gift  of  God.  But 
from  the  second  century  on,  his  conception  of  divine  grace, 
and  the  common  legalism  of  the  early  Christians,  lay  side 
by  side  in  the  thinking  of  the  Church.  Without  grace 
no  man  can  be  saved ;  his.  nature  is  corrupt  and  must 
be  transformed  by  supernatural  power.  But  he  must 
make  the  right  use  of  the  saving  grace  received  through 
the  sacraments.  Under  its  influence,  and  in  the  power 
imparted  by  it,  he  must  live  righteously,  overcoming  his 
faults,  and  growing  day  by  day  in  virtue.  If  he  does 
this  and  secures  forgiveness  for  his  sins  through  the  sacra- 
ment of  penance,  he  will  merit  the  gift  of  salvation  which 


4  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

God  has  in  store  for  him.  This  form  of  synergism  is 
technically  known  as  semi-Pelagianism,  but  it  is  much 
older  than  the  semi-Pelagians,  being  essentially  the  view 
of  the  Church,  both  east  and  west,  ever  since  Irenasus. 

Upon  the  conviction  of  man's  need  was  based  the 
traditional  idea  of  Jesus  Christ  as  a  Saviour,  and  His 
saving  work  was  so  conceived  that  the  belief  in  His  deity 
necessarily  followed.  He  was  thought  by  Paul  to  be 
divine,  not  because  of  the  perfection  of  His  character,  or 
the  completeness  of  His  revelation  of  God's  will  and  truth, 
but  because  by  His  indwelling  the  nature  of  man  is  trans- 
formed. Through  Ignatius  and  Irenseus  this  idea  of 
Christ's  work  entered  into  the  thought  of  the  Church,  and 
became  the  basis  of  the  Nicene  doctrine  of  His  deity. 
From  a  different  point  of  view  Anselm  reached  the  same 
result  when  he  made  the  infinite  guilt  of  human  trans- 
gression require  an  infinite  penance,  and  hence  the  death 
of  an  infinite  Being,  the  god-man,  Jesus  Christ.  The 
deity  of  Christ  being  the  essential  element  in  the  historic 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  that  doctrine,  too,  rested  ulti- 
mately upon  the  belief  in  human  corruption  and  helpless- 
ness, and  would  not  have  become  a  part  of  the  faith 
of  the  Church  had  man  been  thought  of  in  a  different  way. 

With  the  traditional  view  of  human  nature  was  corre- 
lated the  notion  of  the  present  world  as  evil,  sharing  in 
the  curse  of  man  and  doomed  to  destruction  as  he  is. 
To  escape  from  it  was  the  one  great  aim  of  the  serious- 
minded  man.  Salvation  meant  not  the  salvation  of  the 
world  itself,  its  transformation  into  something  better  and 
holier,  but  release  from  it  in  order  to  enjoy  the  blessedness 
of  another  world  altogether.  The  dominant  spirit  was 
that  of  other-worldliness.  To  be  a  Christian  meant  to 
belong  to  another  sphere  than  this,  to  have  one's  interest 
set  on  higher  things,  to  live  in  the  future,  and  to  eschew 
the  pleasures  and  enjoyments  of  the  present.  Asceti- 
cism was  the  Christian  ideal  of  life.  Man  stands,  as  Thomas 


I.]  INTKODUCTION  5 

Aquinas  says,  between  the  goods  of  this  world  and  those 
of  another.  He  who  would  possess  the  latter  must  eschew 
the  former.  He  cannot  have  both,  and  he  must  take  his 
choice.  The  more  he  crucifies  his  worldly  desires  and 
affections,  and  denies  himself  good  things  here,  the  more 
he  may  enjoy  of  future  bliss.  Christianity  promised 
men  blessings  in  a  life  beyond  the  grave  at  the  expense 
of  blessings  here.  It  might,  of  course,  bring  happiness 
in  this  Hfe,  as  the  Christian  contemplated  the  thought  of 
the  eternal  feHcity  to  come,  but  of  earthly  delight  it  had 
none  to  offer.  Rather  it  demanded  the  sacrifice  of  such 
delight  in  order  to  the  inheritance  of  joys  belonging 
to  another  world.  Belief  in  a  future  life  was  fundamental, 
and  immortality  an  essential  article  of  faith.  Given 
doubt  as  to  its  reality,  and  the  whole  structure  of  Christian 
faith  must  fall  to  the  ground.  The  sole  significance  of 
the  present  hfe  lay  in  the  fact  that  it  was  a  probation  for 
the  life  to  come.  It  had  worth  only  because  of  the  ever- 
lasting issues  which  were  determined  by  it.  The  few 
short  years  here  are  as  nothing  compared  with  the  eternity 
beyond,  and  the  wise  man  will  think  of  that  eternity,  and 
live  for  it  alone.  So  far  as  he  may  have  interest  in  his 
fellowmen,  and  the  spirit  of  love  may  prompt  him  to 
concern  himself  with  their  welfare,  it  will  not  be  their 
present  state  which  he  will  chiefly  labour  to  improve. 
For  them,  as  for  himself,  earthly  conditions  are  of  small 
account ;  the  one  important  thing  is  the  salvation  of  their 
immortal  souls.  It  was  not  a  mere  accident,  nor  was  it 
due  to  the  immaturity  of  civilisation  and  the  lack  of 
sensibility  to  physical  comfort,  that  social  service  on  a 
large  scale  was  postponed  to  modern  times.  Rather,  it 
was  because  of  an  altogether  different  ideal,  and  an  alto- 
gether different  estimate  of  the  present  world. 

It  was  of  a  piece  with  the  mediaeval  view  of  the  world 
that  Nature  lost  independent  interest,  and  was  subordin- 
ated to  the  eternal  destinies  of  men.    The  heavens  and  the 


6  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

earth  were  to  pass  away,  and  hence  it  was  not  important 
to  study  them.  Only  spiritual  things  were  worthy  of 
attention.  If  Nature  was  investigated  at  all,  it  was  for 
the  light  it  might  throw  on  eternal  realities,  and  the 
revelation  it  might  give  of  God  and  His  will.  According 
to  Vincent  of  Beauvais,  '  Natural  science  treats  of  the 
invisible  causes  of  visible  things,'  and  '  the  knowledge  of 
all  wisdom  has  no  value  if  it  remain  without  the  know- 
ledge of  God.'  The  few  notable  exceptions  to  this  way  of 
looking  at  things  serve  only  to  prove  the  rule.  Under 
these  circumstances,  natural  science  in  the  modern  sense 
of  the  term  was,  of  course,  impossible.  Only  supernatural 
knowledge,  which  brings  a  man  into  touch  with  eternity 
and  prepares  him  for  life  beyond  the  grave,  has  real  and 
permanent  worth. 

Upon  man's  need  of  salvation  was  based  the  historic 
view  of  the  Church.  Before  the  end  of  the  second  century 
it  had  come  to  be  looked  upon  as  the  sole  ark  of  salvation, 
outside  of  which  there  was  no  possibility  of  life.  Cyprian's 
famous  dictum,  nulla  solus  extra  ecclesiam,  and  his  de- 
claration that  he  who  would  have  God  for  his  Father  must 
have  the  Church  for  his  mother,  but  gave  terse  expression 
to  a  belief  common  already  before  his  day,  and  rapidly 
becoming  universal.  The  necessity  of  membership  in 
the  Church  rested  upon  the  theory  that  saving  grace  had 
been  entrusted  by  the  apostles  to  their  successors,  the 
bishops,  and  could  be  dispensed  only  by  them.  Out  of 
communion  with  the  bishop,  therefore,  meant  out  of 
communion  with  Christ.  The  clergy  who  derived  their 
character  from  the  episcopate  constituted  the  sole  mediators 
of  saving  grace,  and  upon  them  the  laity  were  dependent 
for  salvation.  In  religious  things  the  latter  had  no  rights 
and  privileges  of  their  own  ;  by  themselves  no  access  to 
God  or  Christ.  The  Church  was  composed  primarily, 
not  of  the  laity,  but  of  the  hierarchy.  Where  the  bishop 
is,  there  is  the  Churoh,  for  there  are  grace  and  salvation. 


I.]  INTEODUCTION  7 

Where  he  is  not,  there  is  no  Church,  though  there  be  a 
great  multitude  of  devout  believers. 

The  means  of  grace,  by  which  salvation  is  mediated  to 
men,  are  the  sacraments.  They  have  saving  efficacy 
only  when  administered  within  the  Catholic  Church,  and 
by  one  episcopally  ordained,  though  an  exception  is  made 
for  prudential  reasons  in  the  case  of  baptism.  From 
birth  to  death  the  Church  accompanies  the  Christian  with 
its  gracious  ministrations,  supplying  him  all  needed  help, 
sanctifying  the  most  important  relationships  and  experi- 
ences of  life,  and  enabling  him  to  atone  for  his  sins,  and 
to  secure  strength  to  overcome  them.  It  belongs  to  her 
to  dictate  the  terms  upon  which  the  reconciliation  of  the 
sinning  Christian  shall  be  permitted,  and  to  indicate  the 
amount  of  penance  required  for  his  offences.  To  this  was 
due  the  great  elaboration  of  rites  and  ceremonies,  sacred 
days,  pilgrimages,  hoarding  of  relics,  fastings,  and  other 
ascetic  practices,  which  marked  the  Middle  Ages,  and  were 
so  characteristic  a  feature  of  the  religious  life  of  the  period. 

The  Christian  Church  was  looked  upon,  not  simply  as 
an  ark  of  salvation,  but  also  as  the  supreme  authority  upon 
earth.  The  corruptness  and  inability  with  which  all 
humanity  is  beset  extends  to  the  intellect  as  well  as  the 
will.  Man  is  blind  as  well  as  depraved,  and  is  incapable, 
not  only  of  doing,  but  even  of  knowing  the  right,  unless 
illuminated  by  divine  revelation.  It  is  true  he  may 
possess  knowledge  sufficient  to  guide  him  in  the  ordinary 
affairs  of  life,  he  may  know  what  common  morality  re- 
quires, and  may  have  the  power  to  perform  it,  but  the 
conditions  of  salvation  he  can  learn  and  the  ability  to 
attain  it  he  can  gain  only  from  above.  And  in  the  one  case, 
as  in  the  other,  he  owes  all  he  has  to  the  Church.  Mediator 
of  grace,  she  is  also  mediator  of  light ;  by  her  alone  the  will 
and  truth  of  God  are  infallibly  declared.  The  crisis  out 
of  which  was  born  the  theory  of  the  Catholic  Apostolic 
Church  as  the  sole  ark  of  salvation,  was  due  to  the  spread 


8  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

of  heretical  opinions  in  the  second  century,  and  it  was 
the  need  of  an  objective  authority  that  the  doctrine  of 
Apostolic  Succession  was  designed  by  Irenaeus  to  meet. 
From  the  beginning,  therefore,  the  Catholic  Church  was 
the  infallible  organ  of  divine  truth  as  well  as  the  sole 
mediator  of  divine  grace.  The  heretic  was  as  much  out- 
side of  her  pale  as  the  schismatic.  In  his  famous  work 
on  the  city  of  God,  Augustine  broadened  the  traditional 
notion  to  include  political  as  well  as  intellectual  and  moral 
authority.  In  the  present  millennial  age  the  Cathohc 
Church,  which  is  the  kingdom  of  God  on  earth,  has 
authority  over  nations  as  well  as  individuals.  In  Augus- 
tine's notion  of  the  civitas  dei  and  the  civitas  terrena 
was  rooted  the  papal  theory  of  the  Middle  Ages,  that  the 
Church  has  two  swords,  the  spiritual  and  the  temporal, 
that  the  Pope,  as  head  of  the  Church  and  vice-gerent  of 
Christ,  is  supreme  both  in  civil  and  spiritual  things,  and 
that  all  the  nations  and  sovereigns  of  the  earth  are  subject 
to  him.  Thus  the  Catholic  Church  of  the  Middle  Ages 
was  at  once  the  sole  ark  of  salvation  and  the  supreme 
authority  upon  earth,  moral,  intellectual,  and  political, 
and  submission  to  her  was  the  one  indispensable  require- 
ment. 

The  recognition  of  supernatural  authority  was  carried 
so  far  in  the  Middle  Ages  that  it  even  controlled  men's 
ideas  of  the  physical  universe,  and  dictated  the  prevailing 
world-view  of  the  period.  It  was  commonly  believed  that 
in  the  Bible  is  contained  an  inspired  account  of  the  origin 
and  structure  of  the  world,  and  to  depart  from  it  is  to 
fall  not  only  into  error  but  also  into  sin.  According  to 
St.  Augustine  no  tiling  was  to  be  accepted  save  on  the 
authority  of  the  Scriptures,  '  for  greater  is  that  authority 
than  all  the  powers  of  the  human  mind.'  If  any  one 
wished  to  know  more  about  the  world  in  wliich  he  lived, 
he  turned  not  to  the  world  itself  but  to  the  Scriptures. 
Growth  in  the  knowledge  of  Nature  as  well  as  of  spiritual 


I.]  INTRODUCTION  9 

things  could  come  only  from  a  study  of  divine  revelation. 
The  supernaturalism  of  the  Biblical  writers  was  controlling 
in  this  sphere  as  in  every  other,  and  the  world- view  was 
far  more  primitive  than  that  of  the  Greeks,  for  it  was 
based  upon  the  naive  ideas  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

In  the  CathoHcism  of  the  Middle  Ages  humility,  both 
moral  and  intellectual,  was  the  supreme  virtue,  self- 
confidence  the  worst  of  sins.  Religion  found  its  highest 
exercise  in  magnifying  God  as  the  All-holy,  Powerful,  and 
Wise  Being  in  contrast  with  corrupt,  helpless,  and  blind 
humanity.  Pride  was  the  root  of  all  evil.  The  fall  of 
man,  Uke  the  fall  of  Satan,  was  due  to  it,  and  from 
it  sprang  sacrilege,  schism,  and  heresy,  the  most  awful 
crimes ;  all  were  the  fruits  of  self-love  and  self-confidence, 
the  preference  of  one's  own  ways  and  opinions  to  those 
prescribed  by  the  Church,  God's  representative  on  earth. 


II.  The  Eve  of  the  Reformation 

The  Protestant  Reformation  was  not  exclusively  nor 
even  chiefly  a  religious  movement.  It  involved  a  break 
with  the  historical  ecclesiastical  institution  and  the 
organisation  of  new  churches  independent  of  Rome,  but 
the  break  itself  was  as  much  political  as  religious,  both  in 
its  causes  and  in  its  results.  Dissatisfaction  with  the 
existing  order  of  things  was  widespread  in  Western  Europe, 
and  was  coming  to  ever  more  active  expression.  It  was 
not  confined  to  one  class  of  society,  nor  limited  to  one  set 
of  conditions.  The  period  was  marked  by  discontent 
and  unrest,  moral,  religious,  social,  economical,  and 
political.  The  conviction  was  growing  that  traditional 
customs  and  institutions  needed  adjustment  to  the  new 
needs  of  a  new  age,  and  on  every  hand  criticisms  of  the 
old  were  rife  and  programmes  of  reform  were  multiplying. 
For  centuries  the  Church  had  been  the  most  imposing 


10  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [en. 

institution  in  Europe,  and  the  most  influential  factor  in  its 
life.  Rightly  or  wrongly  it  was  widely  held  responsiLle 
for  current  evils  in  every  line,  and  eveiy  project  for  the 
betterment  of  society  concerned  itself  in  one  or  another 
way  with  the  ecclesiastical  establishment.  As  a  rule, 
however,  the  criticisms  of  the  existing  system  affected 
only  superficial  details,  and  were  neither  radical  nor  far- 

,  reaching.  Abuses  in  ecclesiastical  administration,  financial 
exactions   on   the  part   of  the   ecclesiastical   authorities, 

.  ignorance,  immorahty,  and  venality  on  the  part  of  the 
clergy — these  constituted  in  most  cases  the  burden  of 
complaint.  The  fundamental  principles  on  which  the 
mediaeval  system  rested  were  seldom  made  the  object  of 
criticism  or  of  question.  The  traditional  CathoHc  dogmas 
and  the  beliefs  underlying  existing  religious  practices  were 
commonly  taken  for  granted.  Criticism  confined  itself 
chiefly,  either  to  the  over-emphasis  of  theology  and  the 
substitution  of  barren  orthodoxy  for  practical  religion, 
or  to  abuses  in  the  application  of  accepted  principles 
and  the  displacement  of  vital  piety  by  formalism  and 
extemahty.^ 

Notable  among  the  phenomena  of  the  age  was  the 
tendency  which  we  know  as  humanism,  the  most  modern 
expression  of  the  intellectual  life  of  the  period.  It  is  true 
that  its  significance  has  been  greatly  exaggerated,  and  the 
contrast  between  the  intellectual  fife  of  the  fifteenth  and 
that  of  the  thirteenth  century  much  over-emphasised. 
At  the  same  time  it  is  abundantly  clear  that  the  general 
temper  of  those  whom  we  call  humanists  was  unlike  that 
of  the  leading  thinkers  of  the  Middle  Ages.  The  differ- 
ence was  not  in  the  matter  of  seriousness,  as  often  said, 
for  in  spite  of  the  frivolity  of  many  humanists,  some  of  the 
most  notable  of  them  were  as  earnest  in  purpose  as  any  of 

I  the  leaders  of  the  Mediaeval  Church.     It  lay  rather  in  a 

"%    1  Cf.  what  Luther  has  to  say  about  his  predecessors  iu  his  '  Table  Talk ' 
Works,  vol.  Ix.  pp.  246,  252 ;  vol.  Ixii.  pp.  118.  124. 


l]  introduction  11 

difference  of  attitude  toward  the  present  world  both  of 
man  and  of  nature,  a  recognition  of  its  independent  vahie 
and  an  interest  in  it  for  its  own  sake.  There  was  wide- 
spread rebelhon  among  the  humanists  against  the  trammels 
of  mediaeval  Catholicism,  and  against  the  tyranny  of  the 
ecclesiastical  establishment,  and  the  growing  loss  of 
reverence  for  the  existing  system  which  made  the  spread 
of  Protestantism  possible  was  in  no  small  part  due  to  their 
influence,  as  was  also  the  increasing  conviction  that  a 
reformation  of  some  sort  was  needed.  But  with  the  con- 
structive work  of  the  Protestant  Reformation  and  with  the 
framing  of  its  principles  and  ideals  they  had  little  to  do. 

Of  the  humanists  who  desired  to  promote  a  refor- 
mation of  one  kind  or  another,  or  at  least  to  improve 
religious  and  moral  conditions  within  the  Church,  Erasmus 
of  Rotterdam  may  be  taken  as  a  representative.^  To 
Erasmus  Christianity  was  primarily  an  ethical  system; 
Christ  was  its  great  teacher  and  exemplar;  and  to  be  a 
Christian  meant  to  conduct  one's  life  in  accordance  with 
the  principles  which  governed  Him.  Jesus  appeared 
in  the  role  of  a  sage,  and  Christianity  under  the  aspect  of 
a  moral  philosophy  rather  than  a  religion  of  redemption. 
In  opposition  to  the  schoolmen  the  elaborate  theology 
of  the  Middle  Ages  w^as  pushed  to  one  side  and  the  em- 
phasis laid  on  practical  conduct,  and  in  opposition  to  the 
externality  and  formalism  of  the  prevailing  religious  life 
of  the  day  the  inner  disposition  was  made  alone  essential. 
All  the  paraphernalia  of  mediaeval  Christianity — its  sacra- 
ments, relics,  pilgrimages,  rites  and  ceremonies,  ecclesi- 
asticism  and  asceticism — were  looked  on  as  unimportant. 
Not  that  they  were  necessarily  bad  in  themselves,  but  that 
they  were  not  of  the  essence  of  the  Gospel,  and  became 
vicious  when  they  obscured  the  more  vital  matters.  The 
heart  of  Christianity,  the  one  all-important  thing  accord- 

1  See  especially  his  Enchiridion  Militis  Ghristiani  (1503) ;  his  Eiuomium 
Marias  (1511) ;  and  his  Institutio  Frincipis  Ghristiani  (1518). 


12  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOEE  KANT  [cH. 

ing  to  Erasmus,  is  love  for  one's  fellows,  manifesting  itself 
in  charity,  sympathy,  and  forbearance.  The  governing 
motive  of  Jesus'  life  was  brotherly  love,  and  in  it  the 
Christian  life  finds  its  controlling  principle.  Erasmus  did 
not  break  with  the  Catholic  Church,  nor  did  he,  in  spite 
of  the  ridicule  he  continually  heaped  upon  the  follies  and 
vices  of  priests  and  monks  (as  for  instance  in  his  Praise 
of  Folly),  reject  the  doctrines  and  principles  of  the 
mediaeval  system.  He  was  an  orthodox  Catholic,  as  his 
work  on  the  Symbol  abundantly  shows,  but  his  teaching 
was  inevitably  disintegrating  in  its  tendency,  and  Pope 
Paul  rv.  was  perfectly  right  in  putting  his  works  on  the 
Index.  The  distinction  between  essential  and  non- 
essential in  the  existing  system,  and  the  reduction  of  the 
former  to  the  moral  principles  taught  by  Jesus,  must 
accrue  to  the  neglect  and  disregard  of  a  large  part  of  the 
traditional  theory  and  practice  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
and  though  Erasmus  might  not  himself  draw  the  natural 
conclusion,  it  was  clear  enough  that  others  would. 

In  his  endeavour  to  bring  out  distinctly  the  essence  of 
Christianity  in  contrast  with  the  excrescences  which  so 
commonly  obscured  it,  Erasmus,  like  most  of  the  humanists, 
was  led  to  lay  emphasis  upon  the  supreme  authority  of 
the  Bible.  In  the  Primitive  Church — in  the  days  of  Christ 
Himself  and  His  Apostles — it  might  be  assumed  that  the 
Gospel  appeared  in  its  purest  form,  unadulterated  by  the 
accretions  of  the  centuries,  and  so  the  Bible,  particu- 
larly the  New  Testament,  became  an  object  of  diligent 
study.  Erasmus  himself  published  the  first  edition  of 
the  New  Testament  in  the  original  Greek  in  1516,  and 
followed  it  with  numerous  commentaries  and  editions 
of  the  Fathers,  who  were  supposed,  after  the  apostles 
themselves,  to  be  the  most  authentic  witnesses  to  Christian 
truth,  and  the  most  competent  interpreters  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. The  recognition  of  the  authority  of  the  Bible  was 
not  an  innovation;    theoretically  it  had   been   supreme 


l]  introduction  13 

since  an  early  day.  It  had  been  tlie  object  of  diligent 
and  faithful  study  on  the  part  of  theologians,  and  the 
comfort  and  inspiration  of  multitudes  of  devout  and  pious 
souls  during  all  the  centuries.  In  the  later  Middle  Ages 
vernacular  translations  of  it  became  very  common,  and  in 
many  cases  received  ecclesiastical  approval.  But  it  was  not 
the  exclusive  authority  of  Catholic  Christians.  The  Church 
was  beheved  to  be  the  living  and  infallible  mediator  and  in- 
terpreter of  divine  truth.  To  its  custody  the  Bible  had 
been  committed,  and  in  the  light  of  its  teaching  it  was  read. 
So  long  as  the  Bible  and  the  Church  were  believed  to 
speak  the  same  language  there  was  no  difficulty  and  no 
need  of  defining  the  authority  of  the  one  as  distinguished 
from  the  other.  Only  when  sectaries  and  heretics  set 
the  Bible  against  the  Church,  and  employed  its  teachings 
as  a  weapon  to  break  down  the  existing  system,  did  the 
ecclesiastical  authorities  begin  to  look  askance  upon  it, 
and  to  condemn  its  unauthorised  use.  The  significance 
of  the  humanists'  attitude  in  the  matter  lay  just  here. 
Not  that  they  recognised  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures, 
but  that  they  saw  and  emphasised  the  contrast  between 
Biblical  and  traditional  Christianity,  and  tried  the  latter 
by  the  former.  In  the  later  Middle  Ages  this  was  very 
common  even  beyond  humanistic  circles.  It  became 
more  and  more  the  custom  for  innovators  of  all  kinds  to 
appeal  to  the  Scriptures  against  the  Church,  and  to  find 
warrant  in  the  former  for  every  deviation  from  existing 
principles  and  practices  in  the  political  and  social  as  well 
as  in  the  religious  sphere.  With  denunciations  of  the 
existing  situation  were  joined  representations  of  the  ideal 
conditions  of  primitive  days  to  which  it  was  desired  to 
return.  Some  even  went  so  far  as  to  call  the  Catholic 
Church  anti-Christian,  and  the  Pope  anti-Christ.  While 
most  of  the  humanists,  including  Erasmus  himself,  were 
not  as  severe  and  radical  as  this,  the  watchword  '  back  to 
Christ  *  was  on  the  lips  of  multitudes. 


14  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

Another  influence  working  in  the  same  general  direction, 
to  minimise  the  importance  of  external  rites  and  cere- 
monies, and  to  magnify  the  inner  and  vital  essence  of 
rehgion,  was  mediaeval  mysticism.  Mysticism  has  always 
existed  within  Christian  circles.  In  the  later  Middle  Ages 
it  was  very  widespread,  and  became  a  disintegrating  force 
on  a  large  scale.  The  mystics  emphasised  personal  salva- 
tion to  the  exclusion  of  all  else.  The  contrast  between 
them  and  the  humanists  was  extreme  in  this  respect. 
Christianity  was  regarded  not  as  a  moral  philosophy 
but  as  a  rehgion  of  redemption.  The  attention  was 
turned  wholly  upon  the  one  question  of  immediate  personal 
concern.  How  am  I  to  be  saved  ?  The  mystical  interpre- 
tations of  salvation,  widely  as  they  might  differ  in  detail, 
commonly  made  it  consist  in  union  with  God  to  be  brought 
about  by  meditation  and  prayer,  carried  on  largely  apart 
from  the  ordinary  offices  of  the  Church.  The  result  was 
the  growing  currency  of  a  non-ecclesiastical  piety  which 
might  or  might  not  be  hostile  to  the  Church  and  the 
hierarchy,  but  was  at  any  rate  largely  independent  of  them. 
By  most  of  the  mystics  no  criticism  was  passed  upon  the 
traditional  dogmas  or  customs  of  the  Church,  but  they 
were  subordinated  to  the  inner  life  with  God.  As  is  said 
in  the  famous  Theologia  Germanica  :  '  Now  what  is  this 
union  ?  It  is  that  we  should  be  of  a  truth  purely,  simply, 
and  wholly  at  one  with  the  One  Eternal  Will  of  God,  or 
altogether  without  will,  so  that  the  created  will  should  flow 
out  into  the  Eternal  Will,  and  be  swallowed  up  and  lost 
therein,  so  that  the  Eternal  Will  alone  should  do  and  leave 
undone  in  us.  Now  mark  what  may  help  or  further  us 
towards  this  end.  Behold,  neither  exercises,  nor  words, 
nor  works,  nor  any  creature,  nor  creature's  work,  can  do 
this.  In  this  wise,  therefore,  must  we  renounce  and  for- 
sake all  things,  that  we  must  not  imagine  or  suppose  that 
any  words,  works,  or  exercises,  any  skill,  or  cunning,  or 
any  created  thing  can  help  or  serve  us  thereto.     Therefore 


ij  INTRODUCTION  15 

we  must  suffer  these  things  to  be  what  they  are,  and  enter 
into  the  union  with  God.'  (Miss  Winkworth's  translation, 
chap,  xxvii.) 

Similarly  there  was  widely  current  a  simple  evangelical 
piety  closely  akin  to  that  existing  in  Protestantism  from 
the  beginning.  Doubtless  there  had  always  been  a  good 
deal  of  it,  perhaps  as  much  as  in  the  fifteenth  and 
sixteenth  centuries,  but  it  is  in  the  hterature  of  that  period 
that  we  discover  the  most  frequent  expressions  of  it. 
Its  essence  was  recognition  of  the  love  of  God  revealed  in 
Christ,  renunciation  of  all  merit  of  one's  own,  dependence 
upon  God  and  trust  in  Him.  The  evangehcal  theology 
which  Luther  later  taught  came  to  multitudes  of 
Christians  with  a  very  famihar  sound.  It  was  in  fact 
little  else  than  a  translation  into  articulate  terms  of  a  piety 
in  which  they  had  always  hved.  This  kind  of  piety  also 
meant  as  a  rule  no  criticism  of  or  breach  with  the  existing 
system.  Those  who  were  dominated  by  it  commonly 
remained  devout  and  loyal  Catholics,  and  never  thought 
of  questioning  the  divine  character  of  the  Church,  but 
they  became  inevitably,  even  if  insensibly,  less  dependent 
upon  external  forms,  and  less  subject  to  an  objective 
authority.  They  made  httle  stir  in  the  world,  but  they 
were  quick  to  respond  to  such  a  gospel  as  Luther  pro- 
claimed. The  rapid  spread  of  his  influence  among  the 
German  people  was  in  no  small  part  due  to  the  wide 
prevalence  of  this  kind  of  piety,  and  because  its  exist- 
ence was  hardly  suspected  by  the  authorities  the  success 
of  his  preaching  remained  inexphcable  to  them. 

A  characteristic  phenomenon  of  the  period  was  the 
growth  of  religious  brotherhoods  of  one  kind  and  another 
in  which  both  mysticism  and  the  type  of  piety  just  de- 
scribed came  to  concrete  expression.  To  multitudes  these 
brotherhoods,  while  not  hostile  to  the  Church,  served  in  no 
small  degree  as  substitutes  for  it,  and  many  Christians  found 
their  religious  needs  largely  met  and  satisfied  by  them. 


16  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

The  later  fifteenth  century  was  a  period  of  religious 
revival  on  a  large  scale  in  Central  and  Western  Europe. 
Not  only  those  forms  of  the  religious  life  which  have  been 
referred  to  but  also  strictly  Catholic  piety  was  everywhere 
reanimated.  It  was  a  time  of  social  and  economic  chaos. 
Plague,  pestilence,  and  famine  devastated  large  sections 
of  the  continent.  New  diseases  made  their  appearance 
as  a  result  of  the  growing  intercourse  between  Europe  and 
the  Orient.  The  dread  of  Turkish  invasion  became  more 
acute,  and  fear  and  demoralisation  were  seizing  upon  all 
classes  of  the  community.  The  feeling  of  helplessness 
was  common,  and  men  were  looking  in  every  direction 
for  the  strength  and  confidence  they  lacked  in  themselves. 
It  was  widely  befieved  tnat  the  end  of  the  world  was  at 
hand,  and  terror  was  everywhere  abroad.  Under  these 
circumstances  a  recrudescence  of  mediaeval  piety  in  its 
crassest  form  took  place.  Pilgrimages,  veneration  of 
r  relics,  multiplication  of  ascetic  practices,  increase  of 
I  monasticism,  mark  the  age  in  a  notable  degree.  Serious- 
I  minded  men  felt  themselves  driven  as  seldom  before  to 
I  vvard  off  evil  by  religious  observances.  All  this  was  just 
?  the  opposite  of  humanism  in  its  effects.  If  the  latter 
I  promoted  self-confidence  and  self-reliance,  the  influences 
i  just  referred  to  fostered  self-distrust.  If  the  one  under- 
mined the  traditional  superstition  and  transformed  re- 
ligion into  ethics,  the  other  encouraged  the  most  vulgar 
kinds  of  religious  practice,  and  strengthened  the  hold  of 
the  most  primitive  and  superstitious  rites  and  customs. 
To  persons  of  this  type  humanism  must  seem  barren, 
insufficient,  and  irreligious.  It  might  meet  the  needs  of 
men  of  modern  temper,  but  it  had  nothing  at  all  to  offer 
those  beset  with  religious  fear  and  oppressed  by  their  own 
helplessness.  Luther  was  a  typical  figure  in  this  respect, 
and  the  terror  which  drove  him  into  the  monastery  a  very 
common  experience.  If  other  forms  of  piety  tended  to 
diminish  the  influence  of  the  ecclesiastical  establishment 


I.]  INTKODUCTION  17 

and  of  traditional  principles  and  practices,  this  common 
religious  fear  tended  to  bind  them  more  firmly  upon  the 
consciences  of  the  people.  At  the  same  time  it  made  them 
receptive  to  new  religious  suggestions  from  any  quarter, 
and  led  them  to  seize  blindly  upon  any  help  that  might 
be  offered.  In  general  the  opening  of  the  sixteenth 
century  must  be  recognised  as  a  time  of  ferment,  excite- 
ment, and  unrest  in  religion  as  in  all  other  lines,  a  time 
pregnant  of  change,  equally  hospitable  to  the  most  radical 
and  to  the  most  reactionary  movements.  No  one  could 
foresee  what  would  come  out  of  it,  and  even  now, 
looking  back  upon  the  period,  it  seems  largely  an  accident 
that  the  current  ultimately  flowed  in  the  direction  it  did 
rather  than  in  some  other. 

There  was  in  all  the  tendencies  that  have  been  referred 
to  no  impulse  toward  a  real  reconstruction  of  the  existing 
system.  Things  might  have  gone  on  much  as  they  always 
had,  and  the  Catholic  Church  might  have  retained  its  hold 
upon  the  minds  and  hearts  of  pious  people  everywhere, 
had  it  not  been  for  other  and  alien  influences. 

The  most  radical  programme  of  the  age  was  that  of  the 
great  English  statesman,  John  Wyclif.  Led  by  political 
and  patriotic  considerations  to  question  the  authority  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  institution,  he  set  up  a  theory  of  the 
Church  which,  while  not  new,  was  calculated,  as  he  pre- 
sented it,  to  undermine  completely  the  authority  of  the 
existing  establishment. ^  The  true  Xl^hurch,  he  said, 
following  the  lead  of  Augustine,  is  the  totality  of  the  pre- 
destinated, and  is  not  identical  with  the  Roman  Catholic 
or  any  other  ecclesiastical  body.  The  elect  constitute 
the  true  Church  of  Christ,  and  only  they  ;  and  not  alone 
the  elect  of  this  age,  but  of  all  ages,  those  already  in  heaven, 
both  angels  and  saints,  and  those  not  yet  born,  as  well  as 
those  now  upon  the  earth.  Judas  never  belonged  to  the 
Church,  although  for  a  long  time    an    apostle  in  good 

1  See  his  De  EccUsia. 
B 


18  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

standing  and  repute,  and  Paul  always  belonged  to  it, 
even  before  he  became  a  Christian,  and  while  he  was  still 
a  persecutor.  Of  course,  on  this  theory  membership  in 
the  visible  Catholic  Church  has  nothing  to  do  with  member- 
ship in  the  true  Church  of  Christ  or  with  participation  in 
the  sacraments.  To  the  elect  the  sacraments  are  un- 
necessary, to  the  non-elect  vain.  To  be  within  the  visible 
Church  is  no  help,  to  be  without  it  no  hindrance.  The 
predestinated  who  constitute  the  true  Church  of  Christ 
are  known  to  nobody  but  God.  They  are  not  even  sure 
that  they  are  themselves  elect,  much  less  can  they  tell 
whether  their  fellows  are,  and  so  no  social  bond  holds 
them  together.  Here  on  earth  they  do  not  form  a  com- 
munity in  any  sense,  and  the  word  Church  loses  all  meaning 
in  its  application  to  them.  It  signifies  no  more  than  the 
sum  of  the  scattered  and  mutually  unrelated  individuals 
who  will  one  day  be  gathered  in  heaven,  and  there  for  the 
first  time  compose  a  real  community.  ^Vhat  we  have 
in  this  is  really  not  a  new  idea  of  the  Church  substituted 
for  the  old,  but  the  idea  of  the  Church  destroyed  altogether . 
For  whatever  it  may  be  called,  a  totality  of  segregated 
and  independent  units,  unknown  both  to  themselves  and 
to  others,  certainly  has  no  attributes  which  entitle  it  to 
bear  the  name  of  Church. 

It  is  clear  that  Wyclif's  theory,  carried  out  as  it  was  in  a 
thoroughgoing  fashion,  and  with  explicit  denial  of  the 
traditional  claims  of  the  Catholic  Cliurch  to  be  the  true 
kingdom  of  God,  was  completely  destructive  of  the  exist- 
ing ecclesiastical  system,  and  if  taken  up  by  Christians 
in  general  and  given  practical  application,  would  have 
split  the  Church  in  pieces.  It  is  not  surprising  that 
Wyclif  was  regarded  by  the  Roman  authorities  as  the 
worst  of  heretics.  Only  his  political  prominence  and  his 
influence  with  the  English  government  saved  him  from 
condemnation  and  death.  His  followers,  the  Lollards, 
though  proscribed   and  persecuted,    kept   his    principles 


I.]  INTKODUCTION  19 

alive  for  some  generations,  but  his  theory  of  the  Church 
found  no  general  acceptance  in  England.  It  was  taken 
up,  however,  by  his  younger  contemporary,  John  Huss  of 
Bohemia,  who  added  nothing  essential  to  it,  and  did  not 
modify  it  in  any  important  way,  but  set  it  out  so  clearly, 
and  so  divorced  from  the  many  other  matters  in  which 
Wyclif  was  interested,  that  it  made  a  much  greater  im- 
pression than  it  had  in  Wyclif  s  writings,  and  was  speedily 
known  far  and  wide.  It  cost  Huss  his  life.  In  1415  he 
paid  the  penalty  at  Constance  for  Wyclif's  attack  upon  the 
time-honoured  system.  Catholic  theology  had  no  dogma 
concerning  the  Church,  but  the  authorities  were  quick 
to  crush  anything  that  threatened  the  time-honoured 
theory  upon  which  the  whole  ecclesiastical  structure  was 
reared. 

The  Protestant  Reformation  was  not  the  result  of  the 
work  of  Wyclif  and  Huss  and  of  the  many  other  Christians 
of  the  period  who  were  criticising  and  attacking  the  exist- 
ing system  on  one  and  another  ground.  But  they  assisted 
to  prepare  the  way  for  it,  and  the  widespread  questioning 
as  to  the  nature  and  identity  of  the  Church,  which  resulted 
from  their  attacks  upon  the  traditional  theory,  made  the 
work  of  Luther  and  his  fellow  reformers  easier. 


PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 


CHAPTER  II 

MARTIN   LUTHER 
I.  The  New  in  Luther^ s  TJiougJit 

Though  educated  in  the  University  of  Erfurt,  the  centre 
of  humanistic  culture  in  Germany,  Luther  was  singularly 
untouched  by  the  intellectual  currents  of  his  day.  The 
impulses  which  controlled  him  were  never  those  of  the 
scholar,  the  scientist,  or  the  philosopher.  He  cared  little 
for  clearness  and  consistency  of  thought.  A  satisfactory 
and  adequate  world-view  was  none  of  his  concern.  Of 
intellectual  curiosity  he  had  scarcely  any  ;  of  interest  in 
truth  for  truth's  sake  none  at  all.  He  had  a  marvellous 
command  of  the  German  language,  and  was  a  writer  of 
great  force  and  vigour,  but  he  was  no  litterateur,  and  his 
works  are  strikingly  devoid  of  the  literary  artifice  and 
self -consciousness  of  his  day.  He  was  far  and  away  the 
most  commanding  personality  of  the  age,  and  he  had  mental 
gifts  of  a  very  high  order,  but  his  genius  was  wholly  practi- 
cal. He  was  pre-eminently  a  religious  character,  and  his 
great  work  was  accomplished  in  the  religious  sphere ;  but 
even  there  he  was  not  controlled  by  intellectual  motives. 
At  a  time  when  the  spirit  of  the  modem  age  was  beginning 
to  make  itself  felt  in  the  religious  thinking  of  his  con- 
temporaries, and  questions  as  to  the  truth  of  traditional 
doctrines  were  widespread,  he  remained  entirely  without 
intellectual  difficulties,  finding  no  trouble  with  the  most 
extreme  supernaturalism  and  the  crassest  superstitions 
of   the   current   faith.     His   confidence   in    the   Catholio 


n.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  21 

system  was  absolute,  and  his  acceptance  of  its  tenets 
complete,  until  he  was  shaken  out  of  it  by  practical  con- 
siderations which  had  nothing  to  do  with  theology,  and 
were  not  in  the  least  of  an  intellectual  order.  Under  these 
circumstances  it  is  a  mistake  to  think  of  him  as  a  theologian 
and  of  his  work  as  a  reformation  of  theology.  It  is  equally 
a  mistake  to  think  of  him  as  a  reformer  in  the  institutional 
sphere.  Existing  institutions,  like  traditional  theology, 
might  be  changed  to  a  greater  or  less  degree  as  a  result 
of  his  labours,  but  the  effect  was  incidental  in  the  one  case 
,as  in  the  other.  His  interest  was  wholly  in  the  practical 
religious  life,  and  all  the  differences  between  him  and  his 
Catholic  contemporaries  were  simply  the  consequence  of 
a  radical  divergence  in  this  sphere. 

His  own  conception  of  the  Christian  life  was  the  fruit 
of  a  personal  experience  too  familiar  to  need  recounting 
here.  Driven  into  a  monastery  by  fear  of  the  wrath  of 
God  and  by  the  desire  to  earn  divine  forgiveness  and 
approval  by  meritorious  works,  he  discovered  that  it  was^ 
impossible  to  secure  peace  of  mind  by  such  a  method,  and] 
was  finally  led  to  believe  that  the  only  road  to  peace  lay 
in  repudiating  all  righteousness  of  his  own,  and  depending 
wholly  upon  the  free  grace  of  God  in  Christ.  The  con- 
viction was  not  original  with  him.  Not  only  Paul  and 
Augustine,  but  many  another  pious  soul  had  trodden  a 
similar  road  and  had  reached  the  same  goal.  To  suppose 
that  Luther's  gospel  of  the  free,  forgiving  love  of  God  in 
Christ  was  unknown  in  the  ancient  and  mediaeval  Church 
is  a  great  mistake.  Particularly  in  the  Middle  Ages  it 
found  frequent  expression.  But  not  before  had  the  con- 
viction meant  so  complete  a  revolution  in  a  Christian's 
religious  life,  and  never  had  it  borne  so  radical  fruit. 
This  was  due  in  part  to  Luther's  temperament,  which 
made  compromise  either  with  himself  or  with  others  im- 
possible, in  part  to  the  uncommon  zeal  with  which  he  had 
thrown  himself  into  the  task  of  winning  the  favour  of  God 


22  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

— a  zeal  which  brought  him  the  reputation  of  extraordin- 
ary sanctity  far  beyond  the  confines  of  his  monastery  and 
his  order,  and  gave  the  contrast  between  the  old  and  the 
new  way  an  exaggerated  sharpness  ;  in  part  to  the  fact 
that  he  had  grown  up  under  the  influence  of  the  common 
popular  notions  of  religion,  and  without  any  early  theo- 
logical training.  His  youthful  ideas  of  God,  of  Christ,  of 
the  future  life  and  of  the  unseen  world  were  very  crass. 
Widely  current  as  they  were  among  the  common  people, 
they  were  for  the  most  part  but  caricatures  of  Catholic 
doctrine.  Had  he  been  brought  up  in  theological 
circles  his  experience  would  never  have  meant  such  a 
break  with  his  own  past  as  it  did.  Catholic  theology 
always  laid  emphasis  upon  the  forgiving  love  of  God, 
and  upon  the  vanity  of  independent  human  merit, 
but  the  popular  interpretation  of  it  was  very  different. 
Luther's  own  study  of  some  of  the  great  mediaeval 
mystics,  and  of  Augustine  and  Paul,  which  had  assisted 
him  to  his  new  way  of  looking  at  things,  led  him  at  first 
to  suppose  that  that  way  was  genuinely  Catholic,  and  for 
some  years  he  was  entirely  at  peace  within  the  Catholic 
Church.  But  ultimately,  as  a  result  of  the  controversy 
over  indulgences,  the  conviction  was  forced  upon  him 
that  the  Roman  Church  was  irrevocably  committed  to 
the  vicious  notions  which  he  had  for  ever  abandoned.  The 
break  for  such  a  man  as  he  was  inevitable.  Thenceforth 
it  was  impossible  for  him  to  be  just  to  the  old  system. 
He  interpreted  Catholic  theology,  or  rather  the  scholastic 
theology  of  the  Middle  Ages,  which  he  held  responsible 
for  all  the  errors  of  the  day,  in  the  light  of  his  own  early 
misconceptions,  and  never  ceased  to  denounce  the  school- 
men as  corrupters  of  the  true  Gospel  of  Christ  and  as 
genuine  pagans  like  their  master  Aristotle.  His  hostility 
to  them,  similar  as  it  was  to  that  of  the  humanists,  though 
for  a  very  different  reason,  brought  him  for  a  time  into 
an  artificial  and  unnatural  alliance  with  ¥he  latter,  who 


ilJ  martin  LUTHER  23 

thought  him  one  of  themselves,  and  were  the  more  in- 
censed when  they  discovered  their  error,  as  they  soon  did, 
for  he  and  they  were  of  an  entirely  different  spirit,  and 
their  religious  programmes  totally  unlike. 

Luther's  interpretation  of  scholastic  theology  had 
another  and  more  important  effect.  It  led  him  to  draw 
an  unwarranted  contrast  between  the  Ancient  and  the 
Mediaeval  Church,  and  to  treat  the  latter  as  an  apostate 
from  the  principles  of  the  former.  In  this,  too,  he  re- 
sembled the  humanists,  but  as  in  the  other  case  the  ground 
of  offence  was  dissimilar.  During  the  Middle  Ages  the 
penitential  system  underwent  large  development,  and  the 
schoolmen  felt  obliged  to  devote  themselves  to  its  elucida- 
tion and  defence.  The  controlling  principles  of  the  system 
existed  as  early  as  the  second  century,  and  all  that  followed 
was  a  natural  and  legitimate  evolution,  but  the  necessities 
of  the  situation  made  Christology  the  principal  subject 
of  dispute  and  official  pronouncement  in  the  ancient 
Church,  and  the  theological  emphasis  of  that  age  was 
thus  very  different.  Because  of  this  the  oneness  of 
principle  between  the  Ancient  and  Mediaeval  Church  was 
overlooked  by  Luther,  and  the  purity  of  the  former  was 
extolled  at  the  expense  of  the  latter.  This  explains,  at 
least  in  part,  the  devotion  which  he  always  showed  to  the 
dogmas  of  the  Ancient  Church,  and  in  which  he  was 
followed  by  the  whole  Protestant  communion.  But  as  a 
matter  of  fact  the  difference  between  Luther  and  the 
early  Fathers  was  at  bottom  as  great  as  between  him 
and  the  schoolmen.  It  did  not  he  in  the  sphere  of  theology 
— there  was  much  in  common  among  them  all — but  in 
their  respective  conceptions  of  the  nature  of  the  Christian 
life.  Here,  in  part,  but  only  in  part,  under  the  guidance 
of  Paul,  Luther  went  his  own  way  independent  of  all 
predecessors. 

His  religious  experience,  I  have  said,  though  exceptional, 
was  by  no  means  uniq^ue.     But  some  of  the  conclusions 


24  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

which  he  drew  from  it  were  entirely  new,  newer,  indeed, 
than  he  himself  realised.  The  significant  thing  was  that 
his  experience  led  him  to  believe  himself  already  a  saved 
man,  not  a  mere  candidate  for  salvation,  and  hence  to 
interpret  the  Christian  life  as  the  eSect  rather  than  the 
condition  of  salvation.  How  he  reached  this  conclusion 
it  is  not  difficult  to  discover.  Had  he  been  either  a  specu- 
lative theologian  or  an  ethical  philosopher,  it  would  pro- 
bably have  been  impossible  to  him.  But  influenced  by  the 
common  popular  way  of  looking  at  God,  he  conceived  Him 
so  exclusively  under  the  aspect  of  an  angry  judge  that  the 
one  thing  needful  seemed  escape  from  the  divine  wrath. 
His  sin  troubled  him,  not  on  its  own  account,  but  solely 
on  account  of  the  wrath  of  God  which  it  entailed.  '  As 
wrath  is  a  greater  evil  than  the  corruption  of  sin,  so  grace 
is  a  greater  good  than  the  perfect  righteousness  which 
we  have  said  comes  from  faith.  For  there  is  no  one  who 
would  not  prefer  (if  this  could  be)  to  be  without  perfect 
righteousness  than  without  the  grace  of  God.'  ^  It  was  a 
religious  not  an  ethical  motive  which  controlled  him ; 
not  to  attain  moral  purity,  but  to  be  on  good  terms  with 
God  was  the  supreme  need  of  his  being.  To  claim  that 
the  Protestant  Reformation  was  due  primarily  to  ethical 
considerations,  and  was  the  result  of  dissatisfaction  with 
the  moral  state  of  the  world,  and  of  the  desire  to  raise  the 
moral  tone  of  society,  is  nothing  less  than  a  travesty  upon 
the  facts. ; 

Dominated  as  Luther  was  by  the  sense  of  the  divine 
wrath,  and  the  supreme  need  of  escape  from  it,  the  peace 
which  resulted  from  throwing  himself  upon  the  free  grace 
of  God,  and  repudiating  all  merit  of  his  own,  could  hardly 
be  interpreted  as  anything  less  than  the  escape  which  he 
coveted,  or  in  other  words  as  salvation  itself.  If  salvation 
had  meant  freedom  from  sin  he  could  not  have  thought 

1  Against  Latomus  \  Erlangen  edition  of  the  Opera  Latina  Varii  Argvh 
menti,  vol.  v.  p.  489. 


il]  martin  LUTHER  25 

of  it  as  a  present  possession,  for  he  knew  well  enough  he 
was  still  a  sinner.  But  if  it  meant  release  from  God'e 
wrath  and  the  enjoyment  of  His  favour,  then  it  was  his 
already.  The  significance  of  Luther's  position  at  this 
point  lies  in  the  fact  that  he  claimed  to  be  already  saved, 
not  because  already  pure  and  righteous,  but  on  other 
grounds  altogether,  and  while  still  continuing  to  be  im- 
pure and  unrighteous.  This  constitutes  the  great  differ- 
ence between  him  and  the  Apostle  Paul.  Paul,  too, 
thought  of  salvation  as  a  present  possession  and  of  the 
Christian  as  already  saved,  but  the  ground  of  his  salvation 
was  moral  transformation,  not  divine  forgiveness.  By  the 
indwelluag  of  the  Spirit  the  Christian  is  not  merely  in 
process  of  sanctification,  but  is  actually  changed  already 
into  a  holy  being,  or,  in  other  words,  is  already  saved. 
Paul  was  moved  primarily  by  moral  considerations,  as 
Luther  was  not.  To  Paul  the  one  dreadful  thing  was  the 
corruption  of  the  flesh  to  which  the  natural  man  is  subject. 
To  be  freed  from  it  by  the  agency  of  divine  power — this 
and  this  alone  meant  salvation.  The  jnfluence  of  Paul, 
or  the  influence  of  the  same  forces  which  he  felt,  continued 
to  dominate  Christian  thought,  and  salvation  was  always 
interpreted  by  Catholic  theology,  if  not  always  by  the 
Catholic  populace,  as  salvation  from  sin.  But  the  con- 
sciousness of  sin  was  too  general,  and  the  sense  of  the 
divine  presence  and  power  too  feeble  to  permit  the  heroic 
faith  of  Paul  to  continue,  and  salvation  was  inevitably 
pushed  into  the  future,  and  the  transformation  of  human 
nature  was  thought  of  as  a  gradual  process  completed  only 
in  another  world.  Luther  broke  with  the  Catholic  theory, 
not  by  going  back  to  Paul  and  asserting  a  present  and 
instantaneous  sanctification,  but  by  repudiating  alto- 
gether the  Pauline  and  Catholic  notion  of  salvation,  and 
making  it  wholly  a  matter  of  divine  forgiveness  rather 
than  of  human  character.  Divine  forgiveness  had,  of 
course,  always  been  regarded  as  an  element  in  salvation. 


26'  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ck. 

Luther,  for  the  first  time,  made  it  the  whole  of  salvation. 
That  he  was  able  to  do  it  shows  clearly  enough  where  his 
controlling  interest  lay.  Peace  with  God  in  the  assurance 
of  his  forgiving  love  was  the  one  thing  he  coveted,  and 
the  one  thing  that  always  seemed  most  precious  to  him. 

The  divine  forgiveness  which,  according  to  Luther,  is 
the  whole  of  salvation,  is  a  complete  and  perfect  thing. 
It  does  not  have  to  do  with  particular  sins,  some  of  which 
may  be  forgiven  and  others  not.  The  sinner  is  either 
wholly  forgiven  or  not  forgiven  at  all,  or,  in  other  words, 
he  is  either  wholly  under  God's  favour  or  wholly  under 
His  wrath.  '  Now  it  follows  that  those  two,  anger  and 
grace,  are  so  constituted  when  they  are  without  us  that 
they  act  as  one  whole,  so  that  he  who  is  under  anger 
is  wholly  under  anger,  and  he  who  is  under  grace  is  wholly 
under  grace,  because  both  anger  and  grace  have  to  do  with 
persons.  For  whom  God  receives  into  grace  He  receives 
wholly,  and  whom  He  favours  He  favours  wholly.  On 
the  other  hand,  with  whom  He  is  angry  He  is  wholly  angry, 
for  He  does  not  divide  His  favour  or  grace  as  gifts  are 
divided,  neither  does  He  love  the  head  and  hate  the  feet, 
or  favour  the  soul  and  hate  the  body.  .  .  .  Grace  must 
be  sharply  distinguished  from  gifts,  for  grace  alone  is  life 
eternal,  and  anger  alone  is  death  eternal.*  ^  This  makes 
it  clear  enough  where  Luther's  interest  lay,  and  how  little 
he  was  controlled  by  ethical  considerations. 

Closely  connected  with  the  Catholic  notion  of  salvation 
as  only  a  future  reality,  consisting  in  complete  release 
from  sin,  was  the  belief  that  it  was  in  some  sense  at  least 
a  reward  of  human  merit.  It  is  true  that  it  was  taught 
that  no  man  can  save  himself  or  even  take  the  first  step 
toward  salvation  without  the  assistance  of  divine  grace ; 
in  other  words,  there  is  no  such  thing  as  independent 
human  merit.  But  salvation  was  thought  of  as  depending 
upon  the  use  a  man  makes  of  the  divine  grace  given  him 

*  Against  Latomus,  ibid. ,  p.  490, 


II.]  MAETIN  LUTHER  27 

in  the  sacraments.  It  was  represented  as  a  product, 
not  of  divine  grace  and  the  effort  of  the  natural  man,  but 
of  divine  grace  and  the  effort  of  the  regenerated  man, 
whose  nature  had  been  made  capable  of  co-operation  in 
the  attainment  of  holiness.  The  teaching  of  Paul  shows 
that  this  notion  of  human  co-operation  is  not  a  necessary, 
but  it  is  certairly  a  natural  consequence  of  interpreting 
salvation  in  ethical  terms.  It  must  always  be  difficult 
to  disconnect  human  effort  from  human  character,  and  to 
regard  the  latter  as  the  unaided  work  of  divine  power, 
particularly  so  if  the  process  of  transformation  be  looked 
upon  as  gradual.  Augustine  essayed  the  task,  but  his 
failure  to  secure  a  following,  to  say  nothing  of  his  own 
inconsistencies  in  carrying  out  his  principle,  serves  only 
to  illustrate  the  fact.  To  Luther  the  step  was  made  easy 
by  his  reinterpretation  of  salvation.  If  it  be  nothing  else 
than  the  divine  favour,  and  not  identical  with  the  trans- 
formation of  human  character,  it  may  also  be  independent 
of  all  human  effort.  The  truth  is,  he  was  moving  in  a 
different  sphere  from  his  predecessors,  and  was  actuated 
by  an  altogether  different  interest.  To  look  at  him 
therefore  from  their  point  of  view  is  utterly  to  misunder- 
stand him. 

The  contrast  between  Luther's  notion  of  salvation  and 
the  traditional  CathoUc  conception  is  illustrated  by  the 
difference  between  their  respective  ideas  of  grace.  To 
CathoHc  theology  the  word  signifies  a  divine  substance 
bestowed  upon  man.  As  a  contemporary  of  Luther  put 
it :  '  That  which  truly  justifies  the  heart  is  grace,  which 
is  daily  created  and  poured  into  our  hearts.'  ^  To  Luther, 
on  the  other  hand,  grace  is  simply  the  favour  of  God,  and 
to  be  saved  by  grace  means  not  to  receive  some  sub- 
stance, or  thing  from  above,  or  to  be  transformed  by  divine 
activity,  but  simply  to  be  forgiven  and  restored  to  the 

1  Quoted  by  Planck  [Geschichte  der  protestantischen  Theologie,  voL  i.  p.  32) 
firom  Bishop  Fischer's  Refutation  of  Luther,  published  in  1528. 


28  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOEE  KANT  [ch. 

divine  favour.  As  he  says  in  his  work,  Against  Latomus  : 
*  Grace  I  understand  here  properly  as  the  favour  of  God 
as  it  should  be  understood,  and  not  as  a  quality  of  soul ' 
(p.  489).  In  other  words,  by  divine  grace  Luther  meant 
nothing  else  than  graciousness,  and  if  the  latter  word  were 
always  used  instead  of  the  former  in  reproducing  his  teach- 
ing, much  confusion  would  be  avoided. 

Though  Luther  believed,  as  I  have  already  said,  that 
salvation  is  of  God  alone,  independent  of  all  human 
effort,  he  yet  taught  that  it  is  conditioned  upon  faith. 
Following  Paul,  who  became  here  the  interpreter  of 
the  reformer's  own  experience,  he  maintained  constantly 
that  man  is  saved  by  faith  and  not  by  works.  His 
position  at  this  point  is  the  most  familiar  part  of  his 
teaching.  But  is  not  salvation  thus  made  dependent 
after  all  upon  human  activity  ?  Is  not  the  substitution 
of  '  faith  alone  '  for  the  traditional  formula  '  faith  and 
works '  simply  the  substitution  of  one  form  of  human 
merit  for  another  ?  This  would  be  so  if  faith  were  man's 
own  work,  but,  according  to  Luther,  it  is  the  work  of  God. 
He  produces  it,  and  so  it  is  not  in  any  sense  a  form  of 
human  merit.  God  reveals  Himself  in  Jesus  Christ  as  a 
gracious  and  forgiving  Father,  and  in  the  man  who  is 
conscious  of  his  sin  and  of  his  consequent  need  of  forgive- 
ness the  revelation  arouses  an  instinctive  response.  Feel- 
ing his  need,  which  has  been  brought  home  to  him  by 
the  revelation  of  the  divine  law,  he  finds  in  the  vision  of 
God  in  Christ  the  answer  to  his  need  and  faith  is  inevitable. 
That  he  believes  is  no  merit  of  his.  It  is  because  God  has 
shown  Himself  a  gracious  God  in  whom  he  cannot  help 
believing.  The  revelation  is  entirely  in  God's  hands. 
He  discloses  Himself  to  whom  He  pleases,  and  thus  faith, 
which  is  man's  response,  is  wholly  God's  work.  "Q^he  revela- 
tion of  which  Luther  speaks  is  not  the  general  revelation 
contained  in  the  Scriptures  and  recounted  continually 
from  the  pulpit,  which  everybody  knows  who  happens  to 


II.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  29 

read  the  Bible  or  enter  a  church.  It  is  rather  the  inner 
disclosure  of  God's  gracious  love  to  the  heart  of  one  and 
another  man  to  whom  He  chooses  to  reveal  Himself.  The 
disclosure  is  made  only  through  the  written  and  spoken 
word,  but  not  to  everybody  is  the  vision  vouchsafed. 

Luther  was  thus  a  thoroughgoing  p redes tinarian  ; 
but  his  predestinarianism  was  not  a  theological  or 
metaphysical  affair.  It  is  true  that  in  his  desire  to 
do  away  with  all  human  merit,  and  show  the  sole 
activity  of  God  in  the  salvation  of  man,  he  was  led  to 
present  his  predestinarian  convictions  in  theological  form, 
to  give  them  theoretical  support  in  a  doctrine  of  the 
absolute  and  unconditioned  will  of  God,  taken  directly 
from  scholasticism,  and  to  draw  from  them  deterministic 
conclusions  of  a  very  extreme  type.  But  none  of  this 
is  of  the  essence  of  the  matter,  and  it  should  not  be  made 
the  starting-point  in  interpreting  his  thought.  His  belief 
in  predestination  was  the  fruit  of  experience,  not  of  specu- 
lation. This  is  made  abundantly  clear,  for  instance,  by 
the  fact  that  while  he  frequently  asserts,  in  the  most  cate- 
gorical fashion,  the  absolute  bondage  of  the  human  will, 
and  declares  that  all  our  deeds,  evil  as  well  as  good,  are 
directly  caused  by  God,  he  yet  recognises  man's  freedom 
in  matters  which  do  not  concern  his  salvation.  Evidently 
his  controlling  interest  was  not  to  safeguard  the  divine 
omnipotence,  but  to  give  expression  to  his  own  experience 
of  God's  controlling  power  in  saving  him.  Peace  came 
to  him,  after  his  long  struggle  to  appease  the  wrath  of  God 
by  meritorious  works,  solely  because  of  his  vision  of  the 
forgiving  love  of  God  in  Christ.  The  peace  was  God's 
work,  not  his  own.  God  had  disclosed  Himself,  and  his 
salvation  consisted,  not  in  anything  that  he  did  in  conse- 
quence of  the  disclosure  or  under  its  influence,  but  in  the 
disclosure  itself.  He  found  God  gracious,  he  did  not  make 
Him  so.  The  very  essence  of  the  experience  lay  in  the  fact 
that  God  had  given  it.    To  resolve  it  into  its  divine  and 


30  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

human  constituents,  to  mark  off  the  agency  of  God  and  the 
co-operation  of  man,  one  from  the  other,  in  traditional 
theological  fashion,  would  have  been  to  take  all  meaning 
out  of  it.  Not  two  separable  and  distinguishable  acts,  that 
of  God  and  that  of  man,  but  the  one  act  of  God  disclosing 
Himself  as  a  gracious  and  forgiving  Father,  this  meant  faith, 
this  meant  trust,  this  meant  peace  and  salvation. 

Luther's  notion  of  salvation  as  a  present  reality  led  him 
to  look  upon  the  Christian  life,  as  Paul  did,  as  a  life  of 
perfect  liberty.  The  man  who  trusts  in  God  revealed 
as  a  gracious  Father  is  already  saved  and  has  nothing  to 
fear  in  life  or  in  death.  His  salvation  does  not  depend 
upon  the  success  with  which  he  may  meet  temptation 
and  fulfil  the  divine  law ;  it  is  already  complete.  He  is 
now  as  truly  as  he  will  ever  be  a  child  of  God,  under  His 
fatherly  care  and  protection,  and  enjoying  His  gracious 
favour  and  forgiving  love.  Thus  he  is  set  free  from  the 
necessity  of  working  out  his  own  salvation.  The  bondage 
of  the  law  is  removed.  It  has  done  its  complete  and 
perfect  work  in  bringing  him  to  a  consciousness  of  sin  and 
of  the  need  of  divine  forgiveness.  Henceforth  he  is 
released  from  its  control  and  becomes  a  free  man  in  Christ 
Jesus.  The  principle  of  Christian  liberty  was  funda- 
mental with  Luther.  The  most  beautiful  of  all  his  works, 
and  the  one  which  contains  the  finest  statement  of  his 
Christian  faith  is  entitled  The  Liberty  of  the  Christian  Man. 
Through  faith  in  Christ,  he  says,  the  believer  becomes  a 
'  most  free  lord  of  all  and  subject  to  no  one,'  and  what 
he  means  by  this  appears  clearly  enough  in  such  passages 
as  the  following  :  '  It  is  clear  then  that  to  a  Christian 
man  his  faith  suffices  for  everything,  and  that  he  has  no 
need  of  works  for  justification.  But  if  he  has  no  need  of 
works,  neither  has  he  need  of  the  law ;  and  if  he  has  no 
need  of  the  law,  he  is  certainly  free  from  the  law.'  ^  '  This  is 
a  spiritual  power,  which  rules  in  the  midst  of  enemies,  and 
1  Wace  and  Bucliheim's  edition  of  Luther's  Primary  Works,  p.  262. 


II.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  31 

is  powerful  in  the  midst  of  distresses.  And  this  is  nothing; 
else  than  that  strength  is  made  perfect  in  my  weakness, 
and  that  I  can  turn  all  things  to  the  profit  of  my  salvation, 
so  that  even  the  cross  and  death  are  compelled  to  serve  me 
and  to  work  together  for  my  salvation.  This  is  a  lofty  and 
eminent  dignity,  a  true  and  almighty  dominion,  a  spiritual 
empire,  in  which  there  is  nothing  so  good,  nothing  so  bad, 
as  not  to  work  together  for  my  good,  if  only  I  believe. 
And  yet  there  is  nothing  of  which  I  have  need — for  faith 
alone  suffices  for  my  salvation — unless  that  in  it  faith  may 
exercise  the  power  and  empire  of  its  liberty.  This  is  the 
inestimable  power  and  liberty  of  Christians.'  ^ 

*  A  Christian  man  needs  no  work,  no  law,  for  his  salva- 
tion ;  for  by  faith  he  is  free  from  all  law,  and  in  perfect 
freedom  does  gratuitously  all  that  he  does,  seeking  nothing 
either  of  profit  or  of  salvation,  since  by  the  grace  of  God 
he  is  already  saved  and  rich  in  all  things  through  his 
faith.'  2 

His  idea  of  Christian  fiberty  was  the  most  modern 
element  in  Luther's  teaching,  and  did  more  than  anything 
else  to  undermine  the  authority  of  the  Catholic  Church. 
One  of  the  watchwords  of  the  dawning  modern  age  was 
liberty ;  escape  from  the  trammels  of  traditional  authority, 
and  the  assertion  of  the  independence  of  the  individual. 
Already  this  had  voiced  itself  in  various  ways,  but  for  the 
religious  man  there  was  apparently  no  escape  from  the 
dominance  of  the  ecclesiastical  system.  It  seemed  that 
one  could  be  completely  free  only  by  becoming  irreligious, 
could  throw  off  the  thraldom  of  the  Church  only  by  re- 
pudiating all  for  which  it  stood,  and  giving  up  religious 
faith  and  aspiration  altogether.  The  Church  had  gained 
its  power  because  it  was  believed  to  be  the  only  ark  of 
salvation,  and  so  the  only  means  of  escape  from  eternal 
punishment.  A  man  might  free  himself  from  bondage 
to  the  Church  by  giving  up  his  belief  in  a  future  life,  and 
*  Luther's  Priviary  Wwks,  p.  26S.  >  Ibid.  p.  276. 


32  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [oh. 

thus  denying  the  need  of  salvation,  as  many  did,  or  he  might 
free  himself  from  its  bondage,  as  Luther  did,  by  throwing 
himself  in  faith  upon  the  gracious  favour  of  God  revealed 
through  Jesus  Christ.  Meritorious  works  done  under  the 
direction  of  the  Church,  participation  in  the  sacraments 
administered  by  her,  and  submission  to  her  dictates  in 
things  moral  and  intellectual — all  become  unnecessary 
to  the  man  who  has  this  saving  faith.  Thus  without 
becoming  sceptical  or  irreligious,  while  still  beheving  in 
the  divine  punishment  due  for  sin,  and  in  God's  super- 
natural salvation,  Luther  was  set  free  from  dependence 
upon  the  authority  of  the  historic  ecclesiastical  institu- 
tion, one  ot  the  great  foes  of  the  dawning  spirit  of  liberty. 
Freedom  from  the  necessity  of  earning  one's  salvation 
by  engaging  in  particular  religious  practices  and  perform- 
mg  works  of  special  merit  meant  also  the  recognition  of 
the  sacredness  ot  all  callings,  even  the  most  secular  and  the 
most  humble,  and  the  possibility  of  serving  God  in  worldly 
profession,  business,  and  trade  as  truly  as  in  monastery 
and  priesthood.  For  many  centuries  it  had  been  supposed 
that  the  most  truly  religious  life  was  that  of  the  monk  or 
nun  who  lived  apart  from  the  distractions  and  pleasures 
of  the  world  in  religious  devotion,  and  in  the  practice  of 
rigorous  self-discipline.  To  be  in  the  midst  of  society, 
to  engage  in  trade,  to  indulge  in  the  pleasures  of  friendship, 
to  marry  and  enjoy  the  delights  of  home,  all  this  was 
legitimate,  but  distinctly  less  honourable  than  the  life  of 
celibacy  and  seclusion.  Other- worldliness  was  the  domin- 
ant note  of  traditional  Christian  piety.  Not  to  make  a 
man  a  good  citizen  of  this  world,  but  to  prepare  him  for 
citizenship  in  another  and  altogether  different  world  be- 
yond the  grave,  where  there  is  neither  buying  nor  selling, 
eating  nor  drinking,  marrying  nor  giving  in  marriage,  and 
where  life  is  a  continuous  and  uninterrupted  round  of 
devotional  exercises — to  prepare  him  for  such  a  world 
was  thought  to  be  the  supreme  aim  of  Christianity.    And  so 


ih]  MARTIN  LUTHER  33 

the  more  unworldly  this  life  could  be  made,  the  more 
completely  detached  from  the  ordinary  interests  and 
concerns  of  earth,  the  more  Christian  it  seemed.  In 
opposition  to  this  Luther  taught  with  the  greatest  possible 
emphasis  the  sacrediiess  of  this  life  and  the  holiness  of 
ordinary  human  callings  and  relationships.  The  Christian 
is  already  a  saved  man,  and  his  life  here  on  earth  is  as 
sacred  as  his  life  in  heaven  will  be,  and  in  it  he  may  express 
as  truly  as  there  his  Christian  character  as  a  son  of  God, 
not  by  detaching  himself  from  employment  and  family 
and  friends  and  giving  himself  to  ascetic  and  religious 
practices,  but  by  doing  the  daily  task  faithfully  and 
joyfully,  with  trust  in  God  and  with  devotion  to  His 
will. 

Luther's  writings,  particularly  his  sermons,  are  full 
of  this  message.     Thus  he  says  : — 

'  What  you  do  in  your  house  is  worth  as  much  as  if  you 
did  it  up  in  heaven  for  our  Lord  God.  For  what  we  do 
in  our  calling  here  on  earth  in  accordance  with  His  word 
and  command  He  counts  as  if  it  were  done  in  heaven  for 
Him.'  ^  '  Therefore  we  should  accustom  ourselves  to 
think  of  our  position  and  work  as  sacred  and  well-pleasing 
to  God,  not  on  account  of  the  position  and  the  work,  but 
on  account  of  the  word  and  the  faith  from  which  the  obedi- 
ence and  the  work  flow.  No  Christian  should  despise  his 
position  and  life  if  he  is  living  in  accordance  with  the 
word  of  God,  but  should  say,  "  I  believe  in  Jesus  Christ, 
and  do  as  the  ten  commandments  teach,  and  pray  that  our 
dear  Lord  God  may  l.elp  me  thus  to  do."  That  is  a  right 
holy  life,  and  cannot  be  made  holier  even  if  one  fast  him- 
self to  death.'  ^  '  It  looks  like  a  great  thing  when  a  monk 
renounces  everything  and  goes  into  a  cloister,  carries  on  a 
life  of  asceticism,  fasts,  watches,  prays,  etc.  .  .  .  On  the 
other  hand,  it  looks  like  a  small  thing  when  a  maid  cooks 
and  cleans  and  does  other  housework.  But  because 
1  Works,  vol.  V.  p.  102.  «  Ibid.  vol.  iv.  p.  341. 


34  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [cb. 

God's  command  is  there,  even  such  a  small  work  must  be 
praised  as  a  service  of  God  far  surpassing  the  holiness  and 
asceticism  of  all  monks  and  nuns.  For  here  there  is  no 
command  of  God.  But  there  God's  command  is  fulfilled, 
that  one  should  honour  father  and  mother  and  help  in  the 
care  of  the  home.'  ^ 

An  important  corollary  of  this  estimate  of  the  common 
life  of  man  was  the  breaking  down  of  the  old  distinction 
between  the  clergy  and  the  laity.  The  life  of  the  clergy- 
man is  no  more  sacred  than  that  of  the  layman.  Faith  in 
God  and  devotion  to  His  will  make  him  as  good  as  the 
faithful  and  believing  merchant  or  shoemaker,  but  no 
better.  The  virtue  of  a  calling  is  measured,  not  by  its 
relation  to  the  future  life,  but  to  this  life.  Religion 
becomes  a  thing  of  the  people,  not  merely  of  the  priest. 
Upon  them  rest  its  responsibilities,  and  to  them  belong  its 
privileges  as  truly  as  to  him.  It  was,  therefore,  no  mere 
dictate  of  expediency  which  led  Luther  in  his  famous 
Address  to  the  German  Nobility  to  call  upon  them  to  take 
up  the  work  of  religious  and  ecclesiastical  reformation. 
The  clergy  are  only  the  representatives  of  the  people,  and 
their  ministers  or  servants  m  religious  things;  let  the 
people,  not  the  hierarchy,  rule.  In  his  distrust  of  popular 
wisdom  Luther  himself  might  draw  back  from  democracy, 
whether  in  affairs  civil  or  religious,  and  might  substitute 
for  the  traditional  ecclesiastical  authority  a  secular  author- 
ity scarcely  less  despotic,  but  liberty  for  the  soul  of  man 
lies  in  his  recognition  of  the  sacredness  of  man's  common 
life,  and  of  the  independence  of  the  people  in  religious 
things,  and  that  recognition,  in  spite  of  all  obscuration 
and  misinterpretation,  has  borne  rich  fruit  in  Protestant 
lands. 

But  was  not  such  liberty  as  Luther  taught  subversive 
of  all  morality  ?  To  set  a  man  free  from  the  obligation 
to  work  out  his  own  salvation,  and  to  give  him  the  assurance 

1  Works,  vol.  V.  p.  100. 


ii.j  MAETIN  LUTHER  35 

that  he  is  already  completely  saved — is  it  not  to  take  away 
all  incentive  to  holy  living  and  to  promote  carelessness 
and  vice  ?  The  answer  is  found  in  Luther's  conception 
of  the  nature  of  virtue  and  in  his  interpretation  of  the 
Christian  life.  True  virtue,  he  says,  is  disinterested. 
'  Whoever  turns  good  works  to  his  own  advantage  does 
no  good  work.'  ^  '  If  you  ask  a  chaste  man  why  he  is 
chaste,  he  should  say,  not  on  account  of  heaven  or  hell, 
and  not  on  account  of  honour  and  disgrace,  but  solely 
because  it  would  seem  good  to  me  and  please  me  well  even 
though  it  were  not  commanded.'  ^  And  so  the  Christian 
life  which  is  the  highest  of  all  must  be  wholly  disinterested. 
It  consists,  in  fact,  of  self-forgetful  service.  '  The  highest 
art,  the  noblest  life  and  holiest  conduct  is  the  practice  of 
love  for  God  and  one's  neighbour.'  ^  And  what  Luther 
means  by  loving  God  and  one's  neighbour  is  made  abund- 
antly clear  by  the  words,  '  What  is  it  to  serve  God  and  to 
do  His  will  ?  Nothing  else  than  to  show  mercy  to  our 
neighbour.  For  it  is  our  neighbour  who  needs  our  service, 
God  in  heaven  needs  it  not.'  *  Over  and  over  again 
Luther  sums  up  the  Christian  life  in  this  way.  It  is 
most  beautiful  and  inspiring  to  see  how  in  sermon  after 
sermon  he  shows  what  service  of  one's  fellows  means, 
and  how  rich  and  manifold  a  thing  it  is  as  it  expresses 
itself  in  the  various  relationships  and  conditions  of  life  : 
between  husband  and  wife,  parent  and  child,  tradesman 
and  customer,  master  and  servant,  prince  and  people, 
towards  friends,  strangers,  and  enemies,  on  the  part  of 
rich  and  poor,  learned  and  ignorant,  high  and  low  alike. 
He  was  so  deeply  concerned  in  the  practical  application 
of  the  principle  that  he  even  ventured  in  his  preaching 
and  writing  into  the  sphere  of  finance,  and  undertook  to 
show  how  love  may  find  play  in  the  world  of  business  as 

1  Works,  vol.  vii.  p.  168.  2  jua,  vol.  x.  p.  88. 

»  Ibid.  vol.  V  p.  163. 

*  Ibid.  vol.  vi.  p.  395 ;  cf.  also  Christian  Liberty,  pp.  279,  280. 


36  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

well  as  everywhere  else.^  Never,  indeed,  has  love  for 
others,  expressing  itself  in  social  service,  been  more  per- 
sistently emphasised,  and  never  has  it  been  raised  to  a 
higher  plane  and  given  a  more  controlling  place. 

But  to  be  a  Christian  means  also,  according  to  Luther, 
to  live  a  life  of  purity  and  righteousness.  In  emphasising 
disinterested  love,  he  did  not  undervalue  or  lose  sight  of 
the  other  moral  virtues.  To  overcome  sin,  to  grow  daily 
in  temperance  and  sobriety  and  honesty  and  patience  and 
meekness,  to  fulfil  the  will  of  God  in  all  its  parts,  is  as  truly 
the  duty  of  the  Christian  man  as  to  serve  his  neighbour. 
But  it  is  significant  that  Luther  brought  all  the  moral 
virtues  into  subordination  to  the  controlling  principle 
of  loving  service.  As  he  says  in  his  Christian  Liberty, 
'  For  man  does  not  live  for  himself  alone  in  this  mortal 
body,  in  order  to  work  on  its  account,  but  also  for  all 
men  on  earth,  nay,  he  lives  only  for  others,  and  not  for 
himself.  For  it  is  to  this  end  that  he  brings  his  o^vn  body 
into  subjection,  that  he  may  be  able  to  serve  others  more 
sincerely  and  more  freely.  .  .  .  Thus  it  is  impossible 
that  he  should  take  his  ease  in  this  life,  and  not  work  for 
the  good  of  his  neighbours,  since  he  must  needs  speak, 
act,  and  converse  among  men,  just  as  Christ  was  made  in 
the  likeness  of  men  and  found  in  fashion  as  a  man,  and 
had  His  conversation  among  men.  Yet  a  Christian  has 
need  of  none  of  these  things  for  justification  and  salvation, 
but  in  all  his  works  he  ought  to  entertain  this  view  and 
look  only  to  this  object — that  he  may  serve  and  be  useful 
to  others  in  all  that  he  does,  having  nothing  before  his 
eyes  but  the  necessities  and  the  advantage  of  his  neigh- 
bour. ...  It  is  the  part  of  a  Christian  to  take  care  of  his 
own  body  for  the  very  purpose  that  by  its  soundness  and 
well-being  he  may  be  enabled  to  labour,  and  to  acquire 
and  preserve  property,  for  the  aid  of  those  who  are  in  want, 

1  See  his  striking  tract  on  Trade  and  Usury ^  published  in  1524  {ihid, 
vol.  xxii.  pp.  199  sq.). 


£1.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  37 

that  thus  the  stronger  member  may  serve  the  weaker 
member,  and  we  may  be  children  of  God,  thoughtful 
and  busy  for  one  another,  bearing  one  another's  burdens, 
and  so  fulfilling  the  law  of  Christ.  Here  is  the  truly 
Christian  Ufe,  here  is  faith  really  working  by  love,  when 
a  man  applies  himself  with  joy  and  love  to  the  works  of 
that  freest  servitude  in  which  he  serves  others  voluntarily 
and  for  nought,  himself  abundantly  satisfied  in  the  fulness 
and  riches  of  his  own  faith  '  (p.  279).  Whether  it  be 
personal  purity  or  love  for  one's  fellows,  in  any  case  the 
Christian  life  must  be  a  life  of  unselfish  devotion,  lived 
not  for  one's  own  gain,  and  not  to  win  one's  own  salvation, 
but  in  utter  self-forgetfulness. 

But  as  the  essential  quality  of  the  Christian  life  is  its 
disinterestedness,  it  can  be  truly  hved  according  to  Luther 
only  where  there  is  moral  freedom.  The  principle  of 
liberty  involved  in  the  belief  that  the  Christian  man  is 
already  saved,  so  far  from  interfering  with  Christian  living, 
alone  makes  it  possible  in  any  genuine  sense.  No  one 
can  give  himself  in  self- forgetful  love  to  the  service  of  his 
neighbour  so  long  as  he  is  anxious  and  troubled  about 
his  own  fate.  Only  when  he  has  gained  the  assurance  of 
salvation  through  faith  in  Christ  is  he  set  free  from  the 
shadow  of  fear,  and  enabled  to  devote  himself  unreservedly 
to  his  brother's  good.  So  long  as  he  feels  himself  unsaved, 
he  cannot  do  otherwise,  as  a  serious-minded  and  religious 
man,  than  give  thought  and  time  to  his  own  state. 
Whether  he  shall  pass  Eternity  with  God  or  with  Satan 
must  be  a  question  of  paramount  concern  not  to  the 
selfish  man  merely,  but  to  the  man  of  noblest  religious 
aspirations.  And  hence  to  be  set  free  from  anxiety  about 
one's  owTi  eternal  destiny  is  the  first  step  toward  single- 
ness of  devotion  to  the  service  of  one's  fellows.  In  the 
tract  on  Christian  liberty,  Luther  undertakes  to  show 
that  just  because  the  Christian  man  is  '  the  most  free 
lord  of  all,  and  subject  to  none,'  he  is,  and  can  be,  *  the  most 


38  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

dutiful  servant  of  all  and  subject  to  every  one.'  As  he 
says  in  one  of  his  sermons,  '  You  must  have  heaven  and  be 
already  saved  before  you  can  do  good  fv^orks.'  And  again, 
'  When  you  know  that  you  have,  through  Christ,  a  good 
and  gracious  God  who  will  forgive  your  sins  and  remember 
them  no  more,  and  are  now  a  child  of  eternal  blessedness, 
a  lord  over  heaven  and  earth  with  Christ,  then  you  have 
nothing  more  to  do  than  to  go  about  your  business  and 
serve  your  neighbour.' 

It  is  true  that  liberty  from  anxiety  about  one's  own 
eternal  destiny,  which  Luther  regards  as  essential  to 
disinterested  service,  may  be  the  fruit  of  scepticism  as  well 
as  of  faith.  The  loss  of  belief  in  immortality  and  conse- 
quent indifference  as  to  the  future  may  have  the  same 
result  as  the  assurance  of  salvation.  But  Luther's  trust 
in  God  as  a  loving  and  gracious  Father  meant,  not  only 
escape  from  fear  of  the  future,  but  release  as  well  from  the 
fear  of  the  present.  Trusting  in  God,  man  rises  superior 
to  all  the  ills  of  life.  The  world  in  which  he  lives  is  his 
Father's  world,  and  no  evil  can  befall  him.  He  learns  to 
receive  all  that  comes  in  confidence  and  peace,  to  accept 
life's  blessings  with  joy  and  its  trials  with  cheerful  sub- 
mission, seeing  in  everything  the  hand  of  a  loving  Father. 
He  becomes  a  victor  over  the  world,  not  by  crushing  it 
underfoot,  but  by  being  at  hom€  in  it  and  unafraid  as  a 
child  in  his  Father's  house.  He  has  acquired  a  new  point 
of  view  and  a  new  estimate  of  values.  Life  as  well  as  death 
has  lost  its  terrors  for  him,  and  he  can  give  himself  to 
Christian  service  with  a  singleness  of  devotion  otherwise 
impossible. 

And  not  simply  has  his  faith  brought  him  freedom,  it 
has  brought  him  motive  power  as  well.  He  is  not  only 
set  at  liberty  to  live  Christianly,  he  is  impelled  and  in- 
spired to  do  so.  As  Luther  says  in  the  Schwabacher 
Articles  :  '  Such  faith,  because  it  is  not  a  mere  fancy  or 
darkness  of   heart,   but  a  powerful,  new,  living  notion, 


II.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  39 

bears  much  fruit,  doing  good  continually  toward  God  in 
praise,  thanksgiving,  prayer,  preaching,  and  teaching, 
toward  the  neighbour  in  loving,  serving,  helping,  advising, 
giving,  and  suffering  all  sorts  of  evil  even  unto  death.'  ^ 
And  in  the  Introduction  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  : 
'  Oh,  faith  is  a  living,  busy,  active,  mighty  thing.  It  is 
impossible  that  it  should  not  always  be  doing  good.  It 
asks  not  whether  good  works  should  be  done,  but  before 
one  asks  it  does  them,  and  is  always  doing  them.'  ^  This 
could  not  be  otherwise,  according  to  Luther,  for  faith 
which  alone  makes  the  Christian  man  is  nothing  else  than 
trust  in  the  forgiving  love  of  God  in  Christ.  Such  faith 
is  impossible  to  a  man  who  has  not  had  a  consciousness 
of  sin  and  has  not  felt  himself  to  be  under  the  wrath  of 
God  because  of  it.  Unless  he  has  felt  a  need  of  the  divine 
forgiveness,  forgiveness  can  mean  nothing  to  him.  It  is 
inconceivable  that  he  should  have  saving  faith  and  be 
without  the  desire  and  the  impulse  to  overcome  sin.  More- 
over, the  joy  which  one  knows  who  has  experienced  the 
divine  forgiveness,  freeing  him  from  death  and  bringing 
him  life  and  peace,  must  make  him  eager  to  do  all  he  can 
in  return  for  God's  undeserved  kindness.  It  is  God's 
will  that  he  shall  devote  himself  to  his  brother's  good,  and 
shall  live  purelj^  and  soberly  and  uprightly  for  his  sake  ; 
and  out  of  gratitude  to  God  and  through  the  pressure  of 
His  love  revealed  in  Christ,  and  under  the  inspiration  of 
Jesus'  life  of  service  he  cannot  do  otherwise  than  give 
himself  in  glad  surrender  to  God's  work.  \Thus  a  present 
salvation  by  the  free  grace  of  God  alone,  through  faith 
and  not  through  works,  meant  to  Luther,  not  sloth  and 
carelessness  in  Christian  living,  but  new  aspiration  and 
power.  Confidence  instead  of  fear,  liberty  instead  of 
bondage,  gratitude  instead  of  the  desire  for  reward,  love 
for  others  instead  of  thought  of  self — the  ethical  quality 
of  such  teaching  as  this,  and  the  psychological  insight 

1  Works,  ?ol.  xxiv.  p.  325.  '  Hid.  vol.  Ixiii.  p.  125. 


40  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

displayed  in  it  are  worthy  of  profound  admiration.  It 
was  in  his  conception  of  the  Christian  hfe,  indeed,  that 
Luther  broke  most  completely  with  Catholic  traditionff 

I  have  said  that  salvation  according  to  Luther  is*  by 
faith  in  the  forgiving  love  of  God.  But  such  faith  can 
exist  only  as  God  reveals  Himself  as  a  forgiving  God,  and 
this  He  does  in  Jesus  Christ  alone.  Without  a  knowledge 
of  Christ,  faith  and  salvation  are  impossible.  The  pro- 
clamation of  His  gospel  is  an  indispensable  condition  of 
salvation.  This  gospel  Luther  called  the  '  Word  of  God.' 
The  word  is,  therefore,  to  use  the  traditional  phrase,  a 
means  of  grace,  and  the  one  and  only  necessary  means. 
Wlierever  it  is  heard  there  may  be  faith  and  salvation, 
but  only  there.  The  word  of  God  may  be  read  in  the 
Bible,  it  may  be  communicated  orally,  particularly  by 
preaching,  or  it  may  be  set  forth  by  visible  signs.  These 
signs  are  the  sacraments  of  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper, 
with  which,  for  a  time,  Luther  associated  the  sacrament 
of  penance.  By  them  the  forgiving  love  of  God  is  pro- 
claimed in  vivid  and  impressive  fashion.  They  have 
significance  only  as  they  declare  the  word,  and  conse- 
quently are  without  effect  unless  their  message  is  under- 
stood and  believed.  It  is  not  the  signs  themselves  that 
have  value,  but  only  the  word  of  which  they  are  the 
signs.  Without  it  no  man  can  be  saved,  but  without  the 
sacraments  he  may  be,  provided  he  hear  the  word  in  some 
other  way,  and  understand  and  believe.^  Strictly  speaking 
there  is  thus,  according  to  Luther,  only  one  means  of  grace, 
the  gospel  of  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ,  of  which  the 
sacraments  are  a  visible  expression.  This  does  not  mean 
that  Luther  thought  lightly  of  the  sacraments;  on  the 
contrary,  he  laid  great  emphasis  upon  them.  He  who 
has   been   baptized  has   always  with   him   a   convincing 

1  Cf.  Works,  vol.  xxxi.  p.  351.  *  The  sacraments  without  the  word  are  not 
able  to  do  anything,  but  the  word  without  the  sacraments  is.  If  necessary 
one  can  be  saved  without  the  sacraments,  but  not  without  the  word.' 


11.]  MARTIN  LUTHEE  41 

testimony  that  God  has  forgiven  and  continues  to  forgive 
his  sins,  and  he  who  partakes  of  the  Eucharist  finds  in  the 
brol^en  body  and  shed  blood  of  Christ  tangible  evidence 
of  God's  gracious  love  for  the  sinner. 

It  is  in  the  light  of  his  notion  of  the  word  and  the  sacra- 
ments that  Luther's  theory  of  the  Church  is  to  be  under- 
stood. It  is  often  said  that  he  repudiated  altogether  the 
traditional  doctrine  of  the  Church  as  a  means  of  salvation. 
This  is  true  in  part,  but  only  in  part.  With  his  idea  of 
salvation  as  a  present  reaUty  conditioned  by  faith  alone, 
the  Church  lost  its  significance  as  a  sacramental  institu- 
tion dispensing  saving  grace.  Its  members,  if  possessed 
of  faith,  did  not  depend  upon  its  ministrations  for  salva- 
tion, and  if  without  faith  its  ministrations  had  no  value 
to  them.  With  the  traditional  idea  of  the  Church  as  a 
sacramental  institution  went  also  the  traditional  notion 
of  the  hierarchy.  The  priestly  offices  of  the  clergy  ceased 
to  be  necessary  to  the  laity,  and  thus  a  fatal  blow  was 
struck  at  the  ecclesiastical  domination  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
Having  rejected  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  as  a  saving 
institution,  external  to  the  laity,  and  composed  in  reahty 
of  the  clergy  alone,  Luther  at  first  substituted  for  it  the 
theory  of  Wyclif  and  Huss,  that  the  true  Church  is  the 
totality  of  the  predestinated,  and  includes  all  the  elect, 
born  and  unborn,  living  and  dead,  behevers  and  unbelievers, 
angels  as  well  as  men.  But  this  idea  represented  an  alien 
point  of  view,  and  took  all  meaning  out  of  the  word 
church,  and  Luther  soon  abandoned  it  for  a  notion  more  in 
harmony  with  his  controlling  interest  and  nearer  to  the 
historic  use  of  the  term.  The  true  Church,  he  said,  is  a 
community  of  all  true  believers,  and  since  believers  are 
already  saved,  it  may  be  called  a  community  of  saints — 
the  communio  sanctorum  of  the  Apostles'  Creed.^    It  is 

1  Lnther  always  liked  the  word  Gemeine  (comTnunity)  better  than  Gemein- 
gcha/t  (communion),  for  the  latter  seemed  to  convey  no  clear  meaning.  Sec 
his  Larger  Catechism,  part  ii.  art.  3. 


42  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

spiritual  and  invisible,  for  it  is  composed  only  of  true 
believers  and  is  not  identical  with  the  Church  of  Rome, 
or  with  any  other  ecclesiastical  organisation.  On  this 
account  Luther's  idea  is  often  confounded  with  that  of 
Wyclif  and  Huss,  but  it  is  in  reality  very  different.  It 
"***^  makes  the  constitutive  element  of  the  Church  faith  instead 
of  election  ;  it  confines  the  Church  to  living  believers,  and 
in  particular  it  emphasises  its  social  character.  Accord- 
ing to  Luther  the  Church  is  a  real  community,  not  a  mere 
totality  of  unrelated  units.  He  was  continually  reverting 
to  this  feature  of  it.  Christianity  meant,  not  isolation, 
but  association  and  fellowship  ;  not  the  mere  relation  of 
the  individual  soul  to  God,  but  a  binding  together  of  many 
men  in  common  service  of  God  and  their  neighbours,  and 
in  mutual  service  of  each  other.  In  his  Exposition  of 
the  Ten  Commandments,  the  Creed,  and  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
he  says  :  '  I  believe  that  there  is  on  earth,  wide  as  the  world 
is,  not  more  than  one  holy  general  Christian  Church,  which 
is  nothing  else  than  the  community  or  assembly  of  the 
saints.  ...  I  believe  that  in  this  community,  or  Christen- 
dom, all  things  are  common,  and  each  one  shares  the  goods 
of  the  others,  and  none  calls  anything  his  own.  There- 
fore all  the  prayers  and  good  works  of  the  entire  community 
help  me  and  every  believer,  and  support  and  strengthen 
us  at  every  time  in  life  and  death.  So  every  one  bears 
his  brother's  burden  as  St.  Paul  teaches.'  ^  For  such  a 
community  as  this  the  word  Church  is  a  proper  designation, 
as  it  is  not  for  the  mere  totality  of  segregated  and  unre- 
lated units  of  which  Wyclif  and  Huss  thought. 

But  Luther  differed  still  more  radically  with  Wyclif 
and  Huss  in  making  the  Church  an  indispensable  means 
of  salvation.  In  his  Larger  Catechism  he  says  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  '  has  a  special  community  in  the  world,  which 
is  the  mother  that  conceives  and  bears  every  Christian 
by  the  word  of  God.'  ^    And  in  his  Kirchenpostille  :  '  Who- 

1  Works^  vol.  xxii.  p.  20.  '  Part  ii.  art.  3. 


II.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  43 

ever  would  find  Christ  must  first  find  the  Church.  How 
should  one  know  where  Christ  and  His  faith  are,  so  long  as 
one  does  not  know  where  His  believers  are  ?  He  who 
would  know  something  about  Christ  must  not  trust  him- 
self, or  build  bridges  into  heaven  by  his  own  reason,  but 
must  go  to  the  Church,  visit  and  make  inquiry  of  it.  The 
Church  is  not  wood  and  stone,  but  the  mass  of  people  who 
believe  in  Christ.  To  them  one  must  turn  and  must  see 
how  they  believe,  live  and  teach,  who  certainly  have 
Christ  with  them.  For  outside  of  the  Christian  Church  is 
no  truth,  no  Christ,  no  salvation.'  ^  This  does  not  mean 
that  there  is  no  salvation  outside  a  particular  institution, 
but  simply  that  God  saves  men  only  through  the  word,  and 
the  word  is  known  and  proclaimed  only  where  there  are 
Christian  believers,  or,  in  other  words,  only  where  there  is 
the  Christian  Church.  The  Church  is  the  agent  by  which 
alone  the  revelation  of  the  forgiving  love  of  God  in  Christ 
is  made  known  to  men.  It  is  therefore  primary,  not 
secondary,  a  means  of  salvation,  not  merely  a  company 
of  saved  men.  It  is  a  means  of  salvation  indeed  as  truly 
as  to  the  Catholics,  though  for  a  very  different  reason — 
because  it  teaches  the  gospel,  not  because  it  conveys  grace. 
But  if  the  word  is  proclaimed  only  where  there  are 
Christian  believers,  then  one  may  know  from  the  preaching 
of  the  word  that  the  true  Church  is  present.  WTiere  the 
word  is,  there  the  Church  exists,  and  where  the  word  is 
not,  there  is  no  Church.  *  It  is  impossible,'  Luther  says, 
'  that  there  should  not  be  Christians  where  the  gospel 
goes,  however  few  they  may  be,  and  however  sinful  and 
imperfect,  just  as  it  is  impossible  that  there  should  be 
Christians  and  not  mere  heathen  where  the  gospel  does 
not  go,  and  where  human  doctrine  reigns,  however  many 
they  may  be,  and  however  holy  and  fine  their  conduct.'  ^ 
The  word  is  thus  a  mark  of  the  true  Church,  and  as  the 
sacraments  are  simply  visible  signs  of  the  word,  they,  too, 
1  Works,  vol.  X.  p.  162.  ^  Ibid.  vol.  xxii.  p.  142. 


44  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

if  rightly  administered,  that  is  with  an  understanding  of 
their  meaning  as  testimonies  to  the  forgiving  love  of  God 
in  Christ,  are  marks  of  the  Church.  Where  they  are  thus 
administered  the  true  Church  is  certainly  present,  where 
they  are  lacking  or  wrongly  used  the  true  Church  is  ordin- 
arily absent.  As  Luther  says  in  his  work  on  the  Papacy  : 
'  The  signs  by  which  one  may  know  where  the  Church  is 
are  baptism,  the  sacrament  [i.e.  the  Lord's  Supper],  and 
the  gospel,  and  not  Rome  or  this  or  that  place.  For  where 
there  are  baptism  and  the  gospel  no  one  should  doubt 
that  there  are  saints.'  ^  Thus  arose  the  traditional 
Protestant  formula  that  the  notes  of  the  true  Church  are 
the  word  and  the  sacraments.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
that,  according  to  Luther,  the  word  alone  is  necessary,  and 
the  sacraments  have  significance  only  because  they  are 
testimonies  to  it. 

The  Church,  as  has  been  said,  was  an  indispensable 
agent  of  salvation,  without  which  no  one  can  be  saved. 
But  how  far  Luther  was  from  identifying  the  Church, 
which  is  the  mother  of  believers,  with  any  ecclesiastical 
organisation  is  clear  enough  from  such  a  passage  as  the 
following  :  *  Now  Christ  says  that  not  alone  in  the  Church 
is  there  forgiveness  of  sins,  but  that  where  two  or  three  are 
gathered  together  in  His  name  they  shall  have  the  right 
and  the  liberty  to  proclaim  and  promise  to  each  other 
comfort  and  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  ...  So  that  not  alone 
in  the  congregation  may  they  find  forgiveness  of  sins,  but 
also  at  home  in  the  house,  in  the  field,  in  the  garden  ; 
wherever  one  meets  another  there  he  may  find  comfort 
and  rescue.  .  .  .  When  I  lay  my  troubles  before  my 
neighbour  and  ask  him  for  comfort,  whatever  comfort  he 
gives  and  promises  me,  that  will  God  in  heaven  ratify.'  * 
It  is  in  harmony  with  this  that  Luther  lays  frequent 
emphasis  upon  the  fact  that  all  Christians  are  priests,  and 
have  direct  access  to  God,  both  for  themselves  and  for 

1  Works,  vol.  xxvii.  p.  108.  a  Ibid.  vol.  xliv.  p.  108. 


II.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  45 

others.  There  is  no  special  priest  class  in  the  Church,; 
upon  which  other  Christians  must  depend,  and  whose 
intercession  alone  prevails  with  God.  '  We  are  not  only 
kings  and  the  freest  of  all  men,  but  also  priests  for  ever,  a 
dignity  far  higher  than  kingship,  because  by  that  priest- 
hood we  are  worthy  to  appear  before  God,  to  pray  for 
others,  and  to  teach  one  another  mutually  the  things 
which  are  of  God.'  ^  It  is  clear  enough  from  such  passages 
as  these  that  it  was  not  a  hierarchical  interest  which  led 
Luther  to  put  the  Church  before  the  individual,  but  rather 
a  recognition  of  the  social  nature  of  Christianity,  of  the 
fact  that  the  gospel  has  for  its  end  not  merely  the  salva- 
tion of  individual  and  separate  souls,  but  the  establish- 
ment of  the  kingdom  of  God,  a  kingdom  within  which  men 
live  together  in  mutual  love  and  service. 

This  naturally  suggests  the  question  as  to  Luther's 
idea  of  the  relation  between  the  Church  and  the  king- 
dom. The  primitive  Christians  commonly  thought  of 
the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  future  reality  only,  and  of  the 
Church  as  an  agency  for  gathering  and  preparing  men  to 
enjoy  its  blessings.  Augustine,  on  the  other  hand,  identi- 
fied the  kingdom  of  God  with  the  visible  Catholic  Church, 
and  this  identification  remained  controlling  in  mediaeval 
thought.  But  Luther  took  a  position  different  from  both 
of  these.  The  kingdom  of  God  consists  of  the  reign  of 
God  or  of  Christ  in  the  hearts  and  lives  of  men.  It  is 
established  by  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  and  exists 
wherever  there  is  faith  in  Christ  and  forgiveness  through 
Him.  In  its  present  form  it  is  identical  with,  the  true 
Christian  Church,  but  it  belongs  also  to  the  heavenly  world. 
There,  too,  God  reigns  in  the  hearts  and  lives  of  his  children. 
The  kingdom  of  God  was  a  favourite  conception  with 
Luther,  and  its  conflict  with  the  kingdom  of  Satan  here 
on  earth  a  favourite  theme. ^  In  it  Christ  rules,  and  the 
Christian  believer,  put  by  his  faith  within  the  kingdom  of 
1  Christian  Liberty,  p.  268.  »  Cf.  e.g.  Works,  vol.  viii.  p.  218. 


46  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

his  Lord,  reigns  with  Him,  and  becomes  a  victor  over  all 
opposing  powers.  *  As  regards  kingship,  every  Christian 
is  by  faith  so  exalted  above  all  things  that  in  spiritual 
power  he  is  completely  lord  of  all,  so  that  nothing  whatever 
can  do  him  any  hurt.  Yea,  all  things  are  subject  to  him 
and  are  compelled  to  be  subservient  to  his  salvation.' 
'  Who  then  can  comprehend  the  loftiness  of  that  Christian 
dignity  which  by  its  royal  power  rules  over  all  things, 
even  over  death,  life,  and  sin  ?  '  ^  But  the  victory  is  not 
for  the  Christian's  sake  alone.  As  always,  Luther  keeps 
the  idea  of  serving  and  sharing  to  the  front.  *  Who  then 
can  comprehend  the  riches  and  the  glory  of  the  Christian 
hfe  ?  It  can  do  all  things,  has  all  things,  and  is  in  want 
of  nothing  ;  is  lord  over  sin,  death,  and  hell,  and  at  the 
same  time  is  obedient  and  useful  servant  of  all.  But, 
alas,  it  is  at  this  day  unknown  throughout  the  world.  It 
is  neither  preached  nor  sought  after,  so  that  we  are  quite 
ignorant  about  our  own  name,  why  we  are  and  are  called 
Christians.  We  are  certainly  called  so  from  Christ,  who 
is  not  absent,  but  dwells  among  us,  provided  that  is  we 
believe  in  Him,  and  are  reciprocally  and  mutually  one  the 
Christ  of  the  other,  doing  to  our  neighbours  as  Christ  does 
to  us.'  2 

IT.  The  Old  in  Luther's  Thought 

I  have  been  dealing  hitherto  with  the  new  in  Luther's 
religious  thought,  with  those  ideas  which  were  at  variance 
with  traditional  theory,  and  to  which  Protestant  theology 
owed  its  inception  and  separate  existence.  But  there  was 
much  in  which  he  agreed  with  his  Catholic  contemporaries, 
and  which  he  took  over  from  the  old  system  almost, 
or  quite,  unchanged.  This  was  not  due,  as  is  often  said, 
to  his  conservatism,  or  to  his  indifference  in  matters  which 
did  not  directly  affect  his  central  doctrine  of  salvation. 
1  Christian  Liberty,  p.  267  sq.  a  Ibid.  p.  283« 


XI.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  47 

Ho  retained  the  old  because  it  was  congenial  to  him — no 
small  part  of  it  because  his  experience  made  it  necessary 
to  him.  Instead  of  regarding  it  as  an  inconsistency  in 
his  system — a  mere  traditional  excrescence  upon  his 
thought — we  must  recognise  it  as  of  the  very  essence  of 
the  matter.  Unless  we  do  this  we  shall  fail  to  understand 
Luther  himself,  and  the  development  of  Protestant  thought 
which  followed. 

Fundamental  in  all  his  thinking  was  the  doctrine  of  the 
depravity  and  helplessness  of  the  natural  man.  This  was 
not  a  mere  accidental  survival  of  the  traditional  way  of 
looking  at  things,  it  was  confirmed  by  his  own  experience, 
and  remained  permanently  an  essential  part  of  his  system. 
The  peace  which  he  finally  attained  in  the  monastery  at 
Erfurt  was  not  the  result  of  a  recognition  of  the  moral 
ability  and  independence  of  man.  On  the  contrary,  he 
reached  it  only  when  he  became  convinced  of  the  utter 
vanity  of  human  effort,  and  renounced  all  merit  whatso- 
ever. It  was  the  fruit,  not  of  a  new  estimate  of  the  nature 
of  man,  in  line  with  the  modern  spirit,  but  of  the  old  estim- 
ate made  more  extreme,  and  carried  out  in  a  more  thorough- 
going fashion  than  ever.  The  old,  in  spite  of  its  sombre 
interpretation  of  man's  character,  had  left  at  least  some 
place  for  human  merit.  Luther  gave  it  no  place  what- 
ever; everything  he  put  into  God's  hands.  Nothing 
of  good,  either  in  the  unbeliever  or  in  the  Christian,  is 
of  himself,  all  is  of  God  alone.  Luther's  remarkable  work 
on  the  Bondage  of  the  Will  {De  Servo  Arhitrio)  was  not 
an  exceptional  utterance,  due  only  to  the  heat  of  contro- 
versy. On  the  contrary,  it  represented  his  controlling 
thought,  and  to  the  end  of  his  life  he  regarded  it  as  his 
best,  as  it  was  certainly  his  most  careful  and  studied, 
production.  To  throw  any  doubt  on  human  depravity, 
to  lighten  in  any  way  the  picture  of  human  guilt,  and  to 
suggest  the  existence  of  any  virtue  or  merit  in  man — this 
was  to  belittle  divine  grace,  and  was  the  worst  and  most 


48  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ca 

dangerous  of  errors.  Luther  regarded  it  indeed  as  the 
root  of  all  the  heretical  opinions  and  vicious  practices  of 
his  Catholic  contemporaries.  It  is  evident  that  at  this 
point  he  was  totally  out  of  sympathy  with  the  tendencies 
of  the  dawning  modern  age.  Compared  with  Erasmus 
and  with  the  humanists  in  general,  he  was  a  reactionary, 
and  the  effect  of  his  teaching  could  only  be  to  bind  the 
traditional  supernaturalism  more  firmly  than  ever  upon 
the  minds  of  men.  Its  effect  was  also  to  confirm,  and  in 
many  cases,  to  rehabilitate  the  greater  part  of  the  historic 
system  of  theology. 

One  of  the  notable  elements  in  Luther's  religious  thought 
was  his  conception  of  God  as  a  loving  Father,  who  graciously 
and  freely  forgives  sin,  and  saves  men  without  any  merit  on 
their  part.  But  this  did  not  mean  that  he  broke  away 
from  the  idea  of  God  as  a  stern  and  angry  Judge — the 
avenger  of  sin  who  will  let  no  guilty  man  escape.  On  the 
contrary,  it  was  his  vivid  sense  of  God's  wrath  that  drove 
him  to  despair,  and  God's  wrath  constituted,  not  simply 
the  precondition,  but  the  permanent  background  of  his 
doctrine  of  divine  forgiveness.  It  is  only  in  Christ,  and 
only  to  the  Christian  believer,  that  God  discloses  himself 
as  a  gracious  Father;  outside  of  Christ  there  is  only 
wrath  and  vengeance.  The  explanation  Luther  found 
in  the  atoning  work  of  Christ.  It  is  true  that  in  his  im- 
patience with  the  Catholic  theory  of  penance,  and  with 
the  interpretation  of  Christ's  work  in  its  light,  he  used 
words  on  one  occasion  which  have  been  taken  to  mean 
the  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement.  '  Therefore 
this  word  satisfaction  ought  to  be  used  no  longer  in  our 
churches  and  theology,  but  should  be  commended  to  the 
judges  and  lawyers,  to  whom  it  belongs,  and  from  whom 
it  was  taken  by  the  Papists.'  ^  But  quite  apart  from  the 
isolated  character  of  this  utterance,  to  interpret  it  thus  is 
to  misunderstand  Luther.    The  doctrine  of  the  atonement 

1  Works,  vol  xi.  p.  280. 


II.]  MAKTIN  LUTHER  49 

was  absolutely  fundamental  with  him.  That  God  was 
gracious  to  the  Christian  and  forgave  his  sins  freely  was 
due  to  the  fact  that  Christ  had  suffered  the  penalty  of 
human  sin,  and  had  moreover  lived  a  life  of  perfect  obedi- 
ence, so  that  His  merit  could  be  imputed  to  the  believer. 
'  In  the  first  place,  do  not  doubt  that  you  have  a  gracious 
God  and  Father  who  has  forgiven  all  your  sins,  and  saved 
you  in  baptism.  In  the  second  place,  know,  in  addition, 
that  all  this  has  happened  not  for  nothing,  or  without  the 
satisfaction  of  His  righteousness.  For  there  is  no  room 
for  mercy  and  grace  to  work  over  us  and  in  us,  or  to  help 
us  to  eternal  blessings,  and  to  salvation,  unless  enough 
has  been  done  to  satisfy  righteousness  perfectly ;  as 
Christ  says  :  "  Not  one  jot  or  tittle  of  the  law  shall  pass 
away."  '  ^  The  traditional  scheme  of  redemption  thus 
retained  its  place  in  Luther's  thinking,  and  the  Anselmic 
theory  of  the  atonement,  modified  and  supplemented  in 
wsbjs  that  need  not  be  further  indicated  here,  acquired  a 
prominence  hitherto  unkno^vn.  Had  Luther's  experience 
been  of  another  type — the  fruit  of  a  more  modern  estim- 
ate of  man — he  might  have  repudiated  altogether  the 
mediaeval  notion  of  God  as  an  avenger  of  sin,  and  with  it 
the  doctrine  of  the  atoning  work  of  Christ.  As  it  was, 
only  that  doctrine  made  it  possible  for  him  to  justify  his 
faith  in  the  forgiving  love  of  God,  and  hence  it  became 
more  central  and  important  then  ever. 

With  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement  is  connected  the 
dogma  of  the  Deity  of  Christ.  Unless  He  possesses  the 
divine  nature,  the  work  which  He  does  has  finite  value  only, 
and  cannot  avail  to  atone  for  human  sin.  And  so  the 
Deity  of  Christ  also  constituted  an  essential  element  in 
Luther's  faith.  It  was  retained,  not  out  of  mere  con- 
servatism, or  respect  for  the  traditional  system,  but 
because  it  was  necessary  to  his  fundamental  belief  in 
God's  forgiving  love.  An  added  emphasis  was  given  to  the 
1  Works,  vol.  vii.  p.  175. 
D 


50  PUOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOEE  KANT         [ch. 

Deity  of  Christ  by  the  fact  that  only  in  Him  is  God  appre- 
hended as  a  gracious  Father.  Were  it  not  for  His  revela- 
tion God  would  be  known  only  as  a  God  of  wrath.  It  is 
significant  that  the  contrast  which  Luther  drew  between 
the  Christian  God  and  the  God  of  natural  theology  was  not 
the  traditional  contrast  between  a  personal  father  and  the 
abstract  absolute,  but  between  a  gracious  and  an  angry 
God.  The  latter  alone  is  known  apart  from  Christ, 
and  as  the  former  is  the  object  of  the  Christian's  faith, 
the  Deity  of  Christ  is  made  raore  vitally  essential  than 
ever. 

The  belief  in  the  Deity  of  Christ  is  the  central  element 
in  the  historic  doctrine  of  the  Trinity;  and  so  again  it 
is  no  accident  and  no  mere  sign  of  conservatism  that 
Luther  retained  that  doctrine.  It  is  true  that  in  his  in- 
sistence upon  the  fact  that  all  knowledge  of  God  outside 
of  Christ  is  '  empty  fancy  and  mere  idolatry,'  he  was 
led  at  times  to  oppose  all  speculation  about  the  divine 
nature.  It  is  therefore  not  surprising  that  all  Trinitarian 
formulae  are  entirely  wanting  in  his  Little  Catechism,  and 
that  on  more  than  one  occasion  he  criticised  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  declaring  that  *  the  words  Trinity  and 
Unity  are  mathematical  words,'  ^  and  that '  the  expression 
Trinity  is  not  in  the  Scriptures,  and  sounds  cold,  and 
we  shall  do  much  better  to  speak  of  God,  and  not  of 
Trinity.'  2 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  although  his  interest,  like  that 
of  Athanasius  himself,  was  always  more  in  the  Deity  of 
Christ  than  in  the  distinction  of  persons  within  the  Godhead, 
he  yet  commonly  emphasised  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity, 
and  gave  it  a  prominent  place  in  his  preaching  and  writing.^ 
Moreover  the  doctrine  was  not  merely  a  traditional  form 
of  words  to  him.     He  knew  how  to  make  it  practically 

1  Works,  vol.  iv.  p.  168. 

»  Ibid.  vol.  xii.  p.  378.     Cf.  vol.  ri.  p.  230  «gf. 

»  Cf.  t,g.  ibid.  vol.  ix. 


II.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  61 

useful,  and  to  give  it  a  vital  place  in  the  experience  of  the 
Christian.^ 

Christ's  Deity  meant  to  Luther,  as  to  the  Catholic  theo- 
logians, the  possession  of  a  dual  nature,  the  divine  and  the 
human.  He  thought  in  terms  of  the  traditional  ontology, 
and  drew  the  same  distinction  between  the  nature  of  God 
and  the  nature  of  man  that  the  Fathers  and  schoolmen 
had  drawn.  As  a  consequence,  though  in  his  interest  in 
Christ's  redemptive  work  he  always  laid  emphasis  rather 
upon  the  unity  than  upon  the  distinction  of  His  natures, 
he  yet  found  the  historic  Christological  formulae  entirely 
congenial,  and  his  faith  expressed  itself  naturally  through 
them.  It  is  therefore  not  surprising  that  the  Nicene  and 
Athanasian  Creeds,  as  well  as  the  Apostles',  which  was 
interpreted  as  a  Trinitarian  formula,  were  accepted  by 
him  and  handed  down  to  his  followers  as  expressions  of 
the  truth  which  every  Christian  must  accept.  In  the 
dogmas  of  the  Trinity  and  the  Person  of  Christ  he  found 
his  gospel  of  the  forgiving  love  of  God  confirmed  and 
guaranteed.  WTiere  they  are  believed  and  properly 
interpreted  there  exists  ample  assurance  that  God  is  a 
gracious  Father  through  Jesus  Christ ;  where  they  are 
doubted  or  denied  all  ground  of  assurance  is  gone.  He 
thus  read  into  them  a  significance  which  they  had  not 
before  possessed,  and  gave  them  a  reality  and  vitahty 
lacking  since  the  days  that  gave  them  birth.  During 
the  Middle  Ages  they  had  been  largely  matter  of  tradition. 
Now  they  became  again  in  Luther's  hands  expressions 
of  practical  Christian  faith.  It  may  thus  be  fairly  said, 
with  Harnack,  that  they  were  not  simply  preserved,  but 
rehabilitated. 

While  Luther  denied  that  salvation  depends  in  any  way 
upon  a  man's  own  efforts,  and  so  destroyed  the  traditional 

1  Not  infrequently  Luther  indulged  in  speculations  as  abstract  and  as  dis- 
connected with  the  practical  religious  life  as  those  of  any  schoolman.  But  all 
this  must  be  recognised  as  secondary  not  primary  with  him. 


52  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

incentive  to  virtue,  his  conception  of  faith,  as  has  already 
been  said,  was  such  as  to  guarantee  the  Christ-Uke  char- 
acter of  the  behever's  hfe.  But  unfortunately  he  was  not 
always  true  to  his  o^vn  convictions  in  this  matter.  Sure 
as  he  was  that  the  Christian  believer  cannot  do  otherwise 
than  hve  as  Christ  would  have  him  live,  the  influence  of 
Catholic  tradition  was  so  strong,  and  his  distrust  of  men 
so  ingrained,  that  it  proved  impossible  for  him  to  main- 
tain his  belief  that  faith  alone  is  sufficient  for  holiness,  and 
he  was  obliged  to  add  the  sanctifying  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  In  spite  of  what  he  says  about  the  ethical  power 
of  faith,  he  yet  frequently  declares  that  even  the  Christian 
man  is  weak  and  frail,  and  cannot  hve  as  he  ought  without 
the  presence  and  power  of  the  Spirit.^  This  mystical 
idea  was  evidently  due  largely  to  the  influence  of  the 
Apostle  Paul.  But  while  Paul  made  the  presence  of  the 
Spirit,  transforming  man  from  a  corrupt  to  a  holy  being, 
the  ground  of  salvation,  Luther  conceived  salvation  in  an 
entirely  different  way,  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  the  Spirit 
quite  unnecessary.  The  two  points  of  view  were  wholly 
distinct,  and  only  ambiguity  and  inconsistency  resulted 
from  their  combination. 

Intimately  bound  up  witii  the  Pauline  idea  of  the 
presence  of  the  Spirit  was  the  mystical  conception  of  faith 
as  uniting  the  behever  to  Christ  in  such  a  way  that  he 
ceases  to  be  himself,  and  becomes  one  person  with  Christ.^ 
This  idea  also,  inconsistent  as  it  was  with  his  controlling 
way  of  looking  at  things,  and  mth  his  general  view 
of  faith,  Luther  took  over  from  Paul.  His  doctrine  of 
salvation  was  not  in  the  least  mystical ;  it  moved  wholly 
in  the  sphere  of  personal  relationships.  The  adoption  of 
mystical  conceptions  and  forms  of  speech,  whether  due 
to  the  influence  of  Paul  or  of  Catholic  tradition,  worked 

1  Cf.  e.g.  Works,  vol.  iv,  p.  68  sq. ;  and  the  Disputatio  de  justijicatione  et 
de  muliere  peccatrice,  §  8  (in  Drews's  Disputationen  Dr.  Martin  Luthers, 
p.  50). 

9  Cf.  Christian  Liberty,  p.  264. 


II.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  53 

only  confusion,  and  prevented  his  gospel  from  being  fully 
understood  and  appreciated  by  those  who  came  after  him. 
Similar  difficulty  arose  in  connection  with  the  sacra- 
ments. Consistently  with  his  notion  of  salvation  by  faith 
in  the  forgiving  love  of  God  in  Christ,  Luther  held  that  the 
sacraments  are  nothing  else  than  signs.  They  have  no 
efficacy  in  themselves.  Only  as  the  word  is  believed  to 
which  they  bear  testimony  have  they  any  value  or  influ- 
ence. But  he  was  led  in  part  by  the  comforting  nature 
of  the  rite,  as  a  pledge  of  God's  forgiving  love  received 
at  the  very  beginning  of  life,  and  constituting  an  assurance 
of  His  favour  through  all  the  years  to  come,  in  part  by 
hostiUty  to  the  radicals  of  the  day,  who  commonly  rejected 
it,  to  retain  the  time-honoured  practice  of  infant  baptism. 
The  consequence  was  a  serious  inconsistency  in  his  sacra- 
mental theory.  Believing  that  a  sacrament  could  have 
efficacy  only  where  there  was  faith  in  its  message,  he  was 
led  to  adopt  the  curious  notion  that  faith  is  directly 
bestowed  upon  the  infant  in  the  act  of  baptism.  Baptism 
thus  became  a  channel  of  faith  as  it  had  been  to  the  Catholics 
a  channel  of  grace.  It  is  not  surprising  in  view  of  this 
interpretation  of  infant  baptism  that  Luther  should  have 
accepted  the  traditional  doctrine  of  baptismal  regenera- 
tion. The  whole  notion  of  regeneration  is  out  of  line 
with  his  idea  of  salvation,  and  represents  another  point 
of  view  altogether.  Where  salvation  means  transforma- 
tion of  man's  nature,  as  it  meant  to  Paul  and  to  the 
Catholics  in  general,  the  idea  of  regeneration  is,  of  course, 
entirely  in  place.  But  where  it  means  simply  the  divine 
forgiveness,  to  talk  about  regeneration  is  to  introduce  an 
alien  notion  which  is  bound  to  work  confusion.  Luther's 
retention  of  the  idea  was  due  in  part  to  the  necessity  of 
giving  some  significance  to  the  rite  of  infant  baptism,  in 
part  to  the  influence  of  theological  tradition,  in  still  greater 
part  to  his  inherent  distrust  of  human  nature,  and  his 
conviction  that  it  needed  radical  transformation  by  super- 


54  PROTESrANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

natural  power.  It  was  thus  of  a  piece  with  his  emphasis 
upon  other  parts  of  the  traditional  system,  and  had  ulti- 
mately the  same  root.  The  entrance  of  the  doctrine  into 
Reformation  theology  worked  permanent  confusion,  and 
did  perhaps  more  than  anything  else  to  prevent  his 
followers  from  understanding  his  gospel,  and  making  it 
actually  controlUng  in  Protestant  thought. 

Equally  disturbing  in  its  influence  upon  Luther's, 
thought  was  his  belief  in  the  real  presence  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist.  It  was  a  strange 
belief  for  one  who  held  that  the  sacraments  were  nothing 
but  signs,  but  Luther's  acceptance  of  it  is  easy  to  explain. 
His  tremendous  interest  in  the  gospel  of  God's  forgiving 
love  in  Christ  led  him  to  seize  eagerly  upon  the  doctrine  of 
the  real  presence.  If  the  participant  finds  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  he  has  an  irrefragable 
proof  of  Christ's  death  for  the  sinner,  and  hence  of  the 
truth  of  the  gospel.  To  have  denied  the  real  presence 
would  have  been  to  lose  a  testimony  whose  convincing 
power  could  not  be  overestimated.  It  was  therefore 
natural  enough  that  he  should  retain  the  traditional  belief, 
and  interpret  Christ's  words  :  '  This  is  my  body,'  in  a  literal 
sense.  The  fact  that  the  symbolic  view  of  the  Eucharist 
was  accepted  and  emphasised  at  an  early  day  by  various 
leaders  of  the  radical  wing  of  the  Protestant  movement 
served  only  to  confirm  him  in  his  own  view,  and  to  make 
him  more  rigidly  insistent  upon  it. 

The  belief  in  the  real  presence  is  not  necessarily  incon- 
sistent with  the  notion  that  the  Sacrament  is  a  sign  or 
pledge;  the  presence  may  be  simply  for  the  sake  of 
making  the  testimony  more  sure.  But,  of  course,  the 
natural  tendency  of  it  was  to  promote  the  idea  that  in 
partaking  of  the  Lord's  Supper  one  feeds  upon  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ,  and  so  to  give  the  sacraments  another 
significance  altogether.  To  this  tendency  Luther  not 
infrequently  yielded,  speaking  of  the  Eucharist  in  tradi* 


II.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  55 

tional  fashion  as  the  '  Medicine  of  immortality,'  and  as 
food  for  the  spiritual  nature  of  the  redeemed  man.^  This 
is  genuinely  Catholic,  like  the  idea  of  baptismal  regenera- 
tion. It  is  true  that  Luther's  doctrine  of  salvation 
found  consistent  application  when  he  rejected  the  notion 
of  the  Eucharist  as  a  sacrifice  and  good  work,  and  with 
it  the  dogma  of  transubstantiation.  He  did  much  at 
this  point  to  liberate  Christians  from  the  domination 
of  Church  and  hierarchy.  But  the  other  element  in  the 
traditional  view  of  the  Eucharist,  the  recognition  of  it 
as  a  realistic  vehicle  of  supernatural  grace,  transforming 
human  nature  and  making  it  immortal,  inconsistent  as  it 
was  with  his  controlling  thought,  found  as  massive  ex- 
pression in  his  doctrine  as  in  the  theory  of  transubstanti- 
ation. The  result  was  again  to  obscure  his  gospel  and 
limit  its  influence. 

Another  inconsistency  in  Luther's  thought  was  his  notion 
of  Biblical  authority.  The  basis  of  his  Christian  faith 
was  not  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures.  He  needed  no 
external  guarantee  whatever.  He  believed  the  revelation 
of  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ  primarily,  not  because 
he  found  it  in  the  Bible,  but  because  his  own  experience 
testified  to  its  truth.^  But  in  controversy  with  his 
Catholic  opponents  the  need  of  some  external  authority 
to  set  over  against  ecclesiastical  tradition  and  enactment 
made  itself  vividly  felt.  It  was  natural  under  these 
circumstances  that  he  should  turn  to  the  Scriptures, 
whose  character  as  a  divinely  inspired  and  infallible  book 
had  been  everywhere  recognised  since  the  second  century, 
and  to  which  particularly  in  his  day  it  had  become  common 
to  appeal  when  any  one  had  fault  to  find  with  current 
religious  opinions  and  practices.  Luther  was  only  follow- 
ing the  example  of  others  in  appealing  at  the  famous 
Leipsic  colloquy  of  1519  from  the  Church  to  the  Scriptures. 

1  Cf.  Works,  vol.  XXX.  p.  93  sq. 

»  Cf.  ibid.  vol.  xxviii.  p.  340 ;  vol.  xlviL  p.  353. 


56  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  Fch. 

But  his  attitude  toward  the  Bible,  first  clearly  announced 
at  that  time  and  maintained  permanently,  was  not  the 
mere  result  of  controversial  necessity.  It  was  the  contro- 
versy which  first  brought  him  to  a  clear  consciousness  of 
the  contrast  between  Biblical  and  ecclesiastical  teaching, 
but  quite  independently  of  the  respect  in  which  the 
Scriptures  were  held  by  others,  their  divine  character  had 
vindicated  itself  in  his  own  experience,  and  when  an 
objective  authority  was  needed  it  was  to  them  that  he 
instinctively  turned.  It  was  in  his  study  of  the  Bible, 
particularly  of  the  epistles  of  Paul,  that  he  discovered  the 
gospel  of  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ,  and  more  and  more 
as  time  passed  he  found  it  taught  everywhere,  in  Old 
Testament  as  well  as  New.  It  was  this  gospel  that  gave 
the  Scriptures  their  value  ;  apart  from  it  they  had  no 
real  worth.  It  thus  became  a  criterion  by  which  to  test 
the  various  parts  of  the  Bible.  Some  books,  he  recognised, 
gave  clearer  and  more  faithful  expression  to  it  than  others, 
and  they  were  to  be  most  highly  prized  and  most  dili- 
gently read.  The  New  Testament,  taken  as  a  whole,  is 
superior  to  the  Old,  and  the  Gospel  of  John,  certain 
epistles  of  Paul,  and  1  Peter,  are  superior  to  the  rest  of  the 
New  Testament.  In  comparison  with  them  such  a  book 
as  James  is  only  an  epistle  of  straw,  and  the  Apocalypse 
is  altogether  worthless.^ 

Luther's  distinction  between  the  Bible  and  the  word 
of  God  gave  him  an  uncommon  independence  and  freedom 
in  dealing  with  the  Scriptures.  He  did  not  hesitate  to 
question  the  authenticity  of  a  Biblical  book,  to  pronounce 
one  more  trustworthy  than  another,  and  to  recognise 
mistakes  and  inaccuracies  in  both  Testaments.^  The 
primary  value  of  the  Bible  lay  in  the  fact  that  it  was  a 
means  of  grace — a  revelation  of  the  gospel,  and  hence  such 
defects  in  it  did  not  disturb  him.     Nor  did  they  prevent 

1  Works,  vol.  Ixiii.  pp.  115,  170. 

s  Cf.  ibid.  yol.  viii.  p.  23 ;  vol.  xlvi.  p.  174. 


II.]  MARTIN  LUTHER  57 

him  from  calling  it  in  traditional  fashion  the  *  word  of 
God.'  Commonly  he  meant  by  that  phrase  only  the 
gospel  of  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ,  but  finding  this 
gospel,  as  he  believed,  set  forth  in  most  parts  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  finding  his  religious  life  and  that  of  his 
associates  fed  upon  them  more  and  more  abundantly, 
it  was  easy  for  him  to  fall  into  the  common  custom,  and  to 
give  the  name  '  word  of  God  '  to  the  whole.  This  he 
frequently  did  without  taking  pains  to  distinguish  be- 
tween the  gospel  and  the  Scriptures  in  which  it  was  found. 
Among  his  followers  the  distinction  was  almost  wholly 
lost,  and  the  consequence  was  that  his  insistence  upon  the 
word  of  God  as  the  primary  means  of  grace,  and  as  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  faith  and  salvation,  resulted  in  the  ele- 
vation of  the  Bible  to  a  place  which  it  had  never  before  had, 
and  gave  it  a  religious  influence  hitherto  unknown. 

Moreover,  Luther's  appeal  to  its  authority  against  that 
of  the  Church  gave  it  a  new  significance  in  the  ethical 
and  theological  realm,  which  was  emphasised  still  more 
when  controversy  with  Protestant  radicals  succeeded  the 
original  controversy  with  the  Catholics.  Its  authority 
was  no  mere  form  of  words;  on  the  contrary,  it  was 
taken  very  seriously  by  Luther  himself  as  well  as  by  his 
followers.  He  rejected  wholly  the  allegorical  method  of 
exegesis,  and  insisted  upon  a  literal  interpretation  of  the 
text,  and  Biblical  teaching  increasingly  crowded  out  the 
experience  of  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ  as  the  ground 
of  faith  and  the  source  of  Christian  doctrine.  The  result 
was  a  growing  failure  on  his  part  to  bring  his  religious 
thinking  under  the  dominance  of  one  great  controlling 
principle,  and  therefore  increasing  inconsistency  and 
confusion. 

Luther's  controversy  with  Protestant  radicals  of  various 
types,  and  particularly  with  the  Swiss  reformer,  Zwingli, 
ultimately  drove  him  even  further  in  his  emphasis  on 
external    authority    in    matters    of    doctrine.      In    hia 


58  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

Bekenntniss  vom  Abendmahl  Christi  of  1528,  he  says, 
*  I  confess  for  myself  that  I  regard  ZwingH  as  no  Christian, 
with  all  his  doctrine,  for  he  holds  and  teaches  no  article 
of  the  Christian  faith  rightly.'  *  And  in  the  Schwabacher 
Articles  of  1529,  referring  to  the  true  Church,  he  says  : 
'  Such  church  is  nothing  else  than  the  believers  in  Christ 
who  believe  the  above  stated  articles '  (Article  xii.). 
As  the  Articles  referred  to  are  not  mere  expressions  of  the 
gospel  of  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ,  but  comprise 
many  other  matters  quite  unrelated  thereto,  Luther's 
declaration  meant  a  complete  departure  from  his  principle 
that  faith  in  the  Gospel  is  the  whole  of  salvation,  and  in- 
volved a  repudiation  of  his  own  doctrine  of  Christian 
liberty.  In  his  work,  Dass  eine  christliche  V ersammlung 
oder  eine  Gemeinde  Becht  und  Macht  hahe  alle  Lehre  zu 
urtheileriy  etc.,  he  had  declared  that  every  Christian  has 
a  right  to  test  every  doctrine  for  himself,  and  to  believe 
in  all  matters  as  his  experience  of  God's  forgiving  love 
suggests.^  But  this  broad  platform,  consistent  as  it 
was  with  his  own  fundamental  principles,  he  soon  aban- 
doned, and  maintained  thenceforth  a  doctrinal  position 
as  narrow  in  effect  as  that  of  the  Catholics  themselves. 

Moreover  he  carried  matters  so  far  as  even  to  insist 
that  force  should  be  used  by  the  civil  government  in  order 
to  maintain  sound  teaching  in  the  churches.  All  preachers 
who  opposed  the  Reformation  were  to  be  displaced  by  the 
civil  government,  and  only  supporters  of  it  accorded 
freedom  of  speech.  '  Not  that  one  should  kill  the 
preachers,'  he  says,  '  this  is  unnecessary.  But  they  should 
be  forbidden  to  do  anything  apart  from  and  against  the 
gospel,  and  should  be  prevented  from  doing  it  by  force.'  ^ 
'  If  any  teach  against  a  public  article  of  faith  which  is 
clearly  founded  upon  the  Scriptures,  and  is  believed  by 
all  Christendom  ...  for  instance  if  any  one  teach  that 

1  Works,  vol.  XXI.  p.  225.  •  Ibid.  vol.  xxii.  pp.  146  sq, 

»  Ibid,  vol.  xxii.  p.  49. 


II.]  MAKTIN  LUTHER  69 

Clirist  is  not  God,  but  a  mere  man,  and  like  any  other 
prophet,  as  the  Turks  and  the  Anabaptists  hold,  such  a 
person  is  not  to  be  tolerated,  but  is  to  be  punished 
for  profanity,  for  he  is  not  merely  a  heretic,  but  an 
open  blasphemer.'  ^  Other  errors  which  Luther  would 
see  suppressed  by  the  civil  authorities  were  the  denial  of 
Jesus'  death  for  our  sins,  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
and  of  heaven  and  hell.  This  means  as  extreme  intoler- 
ance as  under  Catholicism.  The  difference  is  that  in  this 
case,  not  the  Church,  but  the  civil  government  is  to 
decide  what  "is  orthodox  and  what  heretical.  In  the 
work  just  quoted  Luther  says  that  if  in  any  town 
Catholics  and  Lutherans  are  teaching  diverse  doctrines 
and  attacking  each  other,  the  municipal  government  is 
to  interfere,  to  take  the  matter  under  consideration,  and 
to  stop  the  mouths  of  those  who  are  not  preaching  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  Scriptures.  This  involves  a  connection 
between  Church  and  State,  and  a  subjection  of  the  former 
to  the  latter  not  recognised  under  Catholicism.  The 
influence  upon  the  religious  life  of  Germany,  ever  since  the 
Reformation,  has  been  very  marked,  but  of  that  I  cannot 
speak  here.  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  according  to  Luther, 
while  the  determination  of  the  teaching  to  be  tolerated  is 
to  be  left  to  the  civil  authorities,  their  decision  must  be 
governed  by  the  Bible.  Not  what  they  may  happen  to 
like,  but  only  what  agrees  with  the  Scriptures  is  to  be 
permitted.  It  is  thus  the  principle  of  Biblical  as  over 
against  ecclesiastical  authority  which  he  is  still  insisting 
on.  But  even  so  tradition  is  given  a  large  place.  Not 
every  interpretation  of  the  Bible  is  to  be  approved.  It  is 
assumed  that  there  exists  among  Christians  a  consensus 
of  opinion  as  to  the  true  teaching  of  the  Scriptures,  and 
with  this  the  individual  must  agree.^  Here  belong,  for 
example,  the  three  ecumenical  creeds,   whose  acceptance 

1  Works,  vol.  xxxix.  p.  250. 

«  Cf.  ibid.  vol.  liv.  p.  288 ;  vol.  Iv.  pp.  74  eq. 


60  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOEE  KANT  [ch. 

is  required  of  every  Christian.  The  principle  of  BibHcal 
authority  as  used  by  Luther  was  thus  after  all  not  so  com- 
pletely opposed  to  the  principle  of  ecclesiastical  authority 
as  it  might  seem.  Corporate  rather  than  individual  opinion 
was  still  made  supreme. 

It  should  be  noticed  still  further  that  Luther's  insistence 
upon  faith  as  distinguished  from  works  gave  to  orthodox 
belief  a  much  more  prominent  and  important  place  in 
Protestantism  than  in  Catholicism.  Luther  himself  never 
identified  saving  faith  and  orthodox  theology.  The  latter 
was  rather,  like  Christian  conduct,  a  necessary  fruit  of  the 
former.  But  the  distinction  between  the  two  was  not 
always  observed  by  his  followers,  and  it  was  inevitable 
that  as  the  word  of  God  tended  more  and  more  generally 
to  be  identified  with  the  Bible,  faith  in  it  should  be 
identified  with  the  acceptance  of  the  teachings  of  the 
Scriptures.  The  result  was  that  orthodoxy  increasingly 
overshadowed  everything  else,  and  instead  of  enjoying 
greater  freedom  in  religious  thought,  Protestants  were 
more  completely  in  bondage  than  their  fathers  had  been. 

It  is  clear  that  Luther  was  far  from  being  a  modern  man 
in  his  interests  and  sympathies.  With  all  his  emphasis 
on  the  liberty  of  the  Christian  man,  he  failed  to  set  him 
completely  free.  The  old  ecclesiastical  fetters  were  broken, 
but  the  theological  bondage  of  the  past  still  continued,  and 
it  remained  for  a  much  later  period  to  complete  the  work 
he  had  only  begun. 


111.]  HULDKEICH  ZWINGLI  61 


CHAPTER  III 

HULDKEICH   ZWINGLI 

To  the  great  Swiss  reformer,  Zwingli,  is  due  a  type 
of  Protestant  thought  very  different  from  Luther's. 
His  figure  has  been  unduly  obscured  by  the  fame  of  his 
younger  contemporary,  Calvin.  His  place  in  the  history 
of  thought  is  really  more  important  than  Calvin's,  for  he  was 
an  originator  where  the  latter  was  only  a  follower.  At  an 
early  day  he  came  under  the  influence  of  humanism,  and 
gave  himself  with  enthusiasm  to  the  pursuit  of  the  new 
learning.  He  became  a  parish  priest  at  the  age  of  twenty- 
two,  but  a  year  after  Luther  found  his  way  into  the 
monastery  at  Erfurt.  His  motive  in  entering  the  priesthood 
was  not  at  all  like  that  which  drove  Luther  into  monasti- 
cism.  An  uncle  and  other  relatives  were  clergymen,  and  he 
was  early  destined  by  his  parents  for  the  same  profession. 
He  had  himself  no  objection  to  it,  for  he  saw  in  it,  as 
many  of  his  contemporaries  did,  opportunity  and  leisure  to 
carry  on  his  classical  studies  and,  through  the  instruction  of 
the  young,  to  spread  the  influence  of  humanistic  principles. 
Of  such  a  religious  crisis  as  Luther  passed  through  he 
knew  nothing.  Entered  upon  his  parish  work  at  Glarus, 
he  soon  found  his  interest  enlisted  in  the  religious  and 
moral  welfare  of  his  flock,  and  in  spite  of  his  scholarly 
pursuits,  he  gave  himself  with  uncommon  zeal  and  devo- 
tion to  his  pastoral  labours.  Li  1516  he  removed  to 
Einsiedeln,  where  there  was  a  famous  shrine  to  which 
pilgrims    resorted    in    large    numbers.     There    he    found 


62  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ca 

religious  conditions  even  worse  than  at  Glarus,  and  he 
became  aroused  to  the  need  of  a  reformation  in  the  country 
at  large.  He  belonged  to  the  humanistic  circle  of  which 
Erasmus  was  the  great  ornament,  and  it  was  natural  that 
he  should  share  the  ideals  of  the  more  serious  and  earnest- 
minded  humanists,  and  should  make  their  programme  of 
reform  his  own.  He  differed  from  most  of  them,  however, 
in  two  respects.  They  were,  as  a  rule,  intellectual  aristo- 
crats, and  looked  down  upon  the  uneducated  multitude ; 
he  had  gained  in  his  parish  work  a  profound  interest  in 
the  common  people.  They  were  cosmopolitan  in  their 
sympathies,  and  delighted  in  calling  themselves  citizens 
of  the  world ;  he  was  a  devoted  patriot,  not  the  least 
of  whose  concerns  was  the  welfare  of  his  native  land. 
Both  of  these  traits  fitted  him  to  understand  Luther. 

He  became  active  in  the  cause  of  reform,  and  entered 
upon  a  campaign  against  current  religious  abuses  before 
he  knew  anything  of  the  older  reformer.  He  remained 
for  some  years  a  faithful  son  of  the  Church,  and  continued 
to  enjoy  a  papal  pension,  as  many  of  his  fellow  humanists 
were  doing,  but  he  found  himself  as  time  passed  more 
and  more  critical  of  the  existing  ecclesiastical  system,  and 
in  Zurich,  where  he  became  pastor  of  the  principal  church 
in  1519,  he  preached  such  doctrines,  and  advocated  such 
practical  innovations  as  to  bring  himself  into  open  conflict 
with  the  Roman  authorities.  The  result  was  a  permanent 
break  with  the  Catholic  Church,  not  only  for  himself,  but 
for  the  municipal  government  as  well,  and  the  establish- 
ment in  the  city  of  a  new  religious  regime.  The  example 
of  Zurich  was  speedily  followed  by  other  cities,  and  the 
Reformation  movement  was  soon  making  rapid  strides 
throughout  the  country. 

Before  he  left  Einsiedeln,  Zwingli  had  heard  of  Luther, 
and  had  begun  to  read  his  writings.  As  a  consequence 
his  religious  views  underwent  a  change.  He  had  long 
shared  the  common  humanistic  recognition  of  the  supreme 


III.]  HULDEEICH  ZWINGLI  63 

authority  of  tlie  Bible,  and  had  appealed  to  it  in  support 
of  his  reforming  efforts.  He  had  learned  to  emphasise, 
as  many  humanists  were  doing,  salvation  by  the  grace  of 
God  alone,  and  the  futility  of  pinning  one's  faith  to  the 
elaborate  penitential  discipline  which  had  grown  up  during 
the  Middle  Ages.  He  had  read  Huss  on  the  Church,  and 
had  been  led  to  radical  views  upon  that  important  subject. 
When  Luther's  teaching  came  to  his  notice  he  was  fully 
prepared  for  it.  It  was  a  more  definite  and  complete 
formulation  of  ideas  which  he  himself  already  held,  and  at 
the  same  time  in  its  over-mastering  emphasis  upon  salva- 
tion by  grace  alone,  through  faith,  and  not  through  works, 
it  supplied  an  organising  and  dominating  principle  hither- 
to lacking.  He  was  speedily  convinced  of  the  Biblical 
character  of  Luther's  teachings,  and  of  their  perfect 
adaptation  to  the  situation  which  he  was  facing.  The 
crying  need  was  liberation  from  dependence  upon  human 
authority  as  represented  in  the  great  mass  of  traditional 
religious  practices.  Luther's  gospel  met  the  need  in  the 
completest  and  most  thoroughgoing  fashion.  Thence- 
forth it  was  Zwingli's  own,  and  upon  its  basis  he  insti- 
tuted a  campaign  far  more  radical  than  he  had  hitherto 
intended. 

It  is  not  surprising  under  the  circumstances  ^at 
Zwingli  should  deny,  as  he  frequently  did,  his  dependence 
upon  Luther,  and  should  insist  that  he  had  gained  his 
principles  for  himself.  He  was  independent  in  no  small 
degree,  and  yet  he  certainly  felt  the  influence  of  the  Witten- 
berg reformer,  and  accepted  his  gospel  without  reserve. 
At  the  famous  Zurich  disputation  of  1523,  which  resulted 
in  the  open  break  with  the  Catholic  Church,  that  gospel 
found  clear  and  unequivocal  expression,  and  the  growth 
of  the  new  movement  in  Switzerland  meant  the  spread  of 
Luther's  principles.  Thus  both  reformers  taught  the 
depravity  of  the  natural  man  and  his  inability  to  save  him- 
self ;  the  vanity  of  all  human  effort  and  the  impossibility 


64  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [cH. 

of  meritorious  works  on  man's  part ;  the  gospel  of 
God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ,  and  of  present  salvation 
through  His  free  grace,  by  faith  and  not  by  works  ;  the  sole 
activity  of  God  in  the  work  of  salvation  and  the  pre- 
destination of  some  to  life  and  others  to  death  ;  the  liberty 
of  the  Christian  man  and  his  assurance  of  salvation  ;  the 
universal  priesthood  of  believers  and  the  true  Church  a 
community  of  saints.  They  also  maintained  much  of  the 
traditional  system  of  theology,  mcluding  the  doctrines  of 
the  person  and  work  oi  Christ  and  the  Trinity.  They  were 
one  in  rejecting  the  authority  of  the  Roman  Church  and 
papacy,  the  hierarchical  principles  of  Catholicism,  the 
doctrines  of  the  mass  and  of  purgatory,  five  of  the  seven 
sacraments,  including  the  whole  penitential  system,  the 
ascetic  interpretation  of  the  Christian  life,  monasticism 
and  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy,  and  the  great  mass  of 
ecclesiastical  rites  and  ceremonies,  feasts,  fasts,  pilgrim- 
ages, and  the  like.  They  introduced  radical  changes  in 
traditional  forms  of  worship,  Zwingli  going  much  further 
at  this  point  than  Luther,  and  they  gave  the  civil  govern- 
ment a  larger  measure  of  control  in  ecclesiastical  affairs 
than  it  had  hitherto  enjoyed.  There  was  thus  a  consider- 
able area  of  agreement  between  the  two  reformers,  and 
their  common  thought  was  inherited  by  all  the  Protestant 
churches. 

But  there  were  also  divergences.  Zwingli's  training 
and  experience  had  been  very  unlike  Luther's,  and  it  was 
inevitable  that  the  gospel  which  he  learned  from  him 
should  occupy  a  different  place  in  his  thinking,  and  should 
be  interpreted  in  other  ways.  Under  the  circumstances 
it  is  surprising  that  the  two  men  differed  as  little  as  they 
did.  But  differences  there  were,  and  some  of  them  are 
historically  important,  for  they  represent  permanent 
differences  between  the  Lutheran  and  Reformed  wings  of 
Protestantism. 

Zwingli's  departures  from  Luther  had  a  common  root 


111.]  HULDREICH  ZWINGLI  65 

and  were  all  of  a  piece.  Humanist  as  he  was,  he  had  a 
wider  horizon  than  the  Wittenberg  reformer,  and  was 
unable  to  look  at  matters  so  exclusively  in  the  light  of  the 
work  of  Jesus  Christ.  Religion  he  defined  as  the  worship 
of  God  and  the  doing  of  His  will.^  He  recognised  that 
many  besides  Christians,  and  quite  independently  of  the 
Christian  revelation,  had  been  religious  in  this  sense,  for 
instance  Hercules,  Theseus,  and  Socrates,  and  he  main- 
tained that  they  were  saved  as  truly  as  Christian  believers.^ ' 
Under  Luther's  influence  he  frequently  asserted  that 
salvation  was  through  Christ  alone,  but  the  broader  view 
was  truer  to  his  own  way  of  thinking,  and  was  never 
abandoned  by  him.  God,  he  taught,  has  revealed  Him- 
self, not  only  through  Christ,  but  in  many  other  ways. 
From  the  beginning  He  has  been  making  His  will  known 
to  men,  and  has  had  His  true  worshippers  and  obedient 
children. 

Christianity  is  God's  supreme  revelation,  and  is  there- 
fore the  highest  and  best  of  all  religions.  This  revelation  is 
set  forth  in  the  Bible,  which  is  the  word  of  God,  not  because 
it  contains  the  gospel  of  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ, 
but  because  it  reveals  God's  will.  From  it  one  can  learn 
as  from  no  other  source  what  God  would  have  men  believe 
and  do.  It  is  not  a  means  of  grace  in  Luther's  sense,  but 
a  guide  for  Christian  faith  and  life.  His  distinction 
between  the  gospel  and  the  Bible  as  a  whole  is  lost  sight 
of,  and  the  latter  is  treated  as  equally  authoritative  in  all 
its  parts. 

The  work  of  Christ  consisted  chiefly  in  the  revelation 
which  He  brought  of  the  divine  will.  Because  of  it  He  is 
the  Saviour  of  men.  The  contrast  between  God's  dis- 
closure of  Himself  in  Jesus  Christ  and  His  general  activity 
as  Ruler  and  Governor  of  the  world  largely  disappears. 
The  same  is  true  of  the  contrast  between  law  and 
gospel,  of  which  Luther  made  so  much.     The  gospel  is 

'  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  175  sq.  >  Cf.  ibid.  vol.  iv.  p.  65. 

E 


66  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

God's  total  revelation  and  includes  the  law.  The  two  are 
in  principle  one.  '  The  gospel  is  itself  a  new  law.'  ^  Both 
of  them  are  declarations  of  God's  will,  and  the  one  supple- 
ments and  perfects  the  other.  The  ceremonial  law  is 
done  away  by  Christ,  but  not  the  moral  law,  which  is 
written  upon  the  hearts  of  men  as  well  as  upon  the  tables 
of  stone.  Christian  liberty  means  release,  not  from  all 
law,  but  only  from  subjection  to  human  enactments  in 
religious  affairs,  that  is  from  the  enactments  of  the  Church. 
The  Christian  is  still  bound  to  obey  God,  but  not  man. 

Of  a  piece  with  his  wider  view  of  Christianity  was 
Zwingli's  conception  of  faith.  Faith  is  not  only  trust 
in  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ,  but  also  the  acceptance  of 
His  truth  and  confidence  in  His  providential  love  revealed 
in  all  His  works.  Much  is  made  of  the  goodness  of  God 
which  controls  all  His  activities,  and  manifests  itself,  not 
simply  in  the  salvation  of  sinners,  but  in  the  entire  govern- 
ment of  the  world.  Heathen  have  believed  in  God  as  well 
as  Christians,  though  they  have  known  nothing  about 
Christ,  and  the  faith  which  the  Christian  has  in  God  is  of 
the  same  general  nature,  though  more  intelligent  and 
better  grounded. 

It  is  consonant  with  this  general  way  of  looking  at  things 
that  Zwingli  laid  less  stress  than  Luther  upon  the  word 
and  the  sacraments  as  means  of  grace.  While  ordinarily 
faith  and  salvation  follow  the  preaching  of  the  gospel, 
they  may  be  independent  of  it;  and  still  less  are  the 
sacraments  indispensable.  For  some  time  Zwingli  repudi- 
ated altogether  the  idea  that  the  latter  are  means  of  grace, 
and  asserted  that  they  constitute  only  pledges  which  the 
Christian  gives  of  his  faith  and  discipleship.^  Later, 
however,  he  recognised  that  they  might  have  value  as 
testimonies  to  God's  forgiving  love,^  but  he  never  made  as 
much  of  this  aspect  of  them  as  Luther  did,  and  so  it  was 
easy  for  him  to  give  up  altogether  the  traditional  notion 
I  Works,  vol.  i.  p.  211.     2  cf.  ibid,  vol.  iii.  p.  231.    »  Cf.  e.g.  ibid.  vol.  iv.  p.  57. 


III.]  HULDREICH  ZWINGLI  67 

of  the  real  presence  in  the  Eucharist,  and  to  adopt  the 
symbohcal  interpretation  of  the  rite  first  suggested  to  him 
by  the  writings  of  Erasmus.^  The  current  idea  seemed 
to  carry  with  it  the  crass  superstitions  of  the  CathoHc 
faith  in  regard  to  the  nature  of  salvation,  and  he  de- 
nounced it  with  increasing  vigour.  The  result  was  a 
serious  controversy  with  Luther  and  a  permanent  and 
disastrous  division  in  the  ranks  of  Protestantism.  It 
may  seem  that  the  controversy  concerned  only  a  minor 
matter,  and  that  the  difference  between  the  two  reformers 
was  of  no  such  importance  as  to  justify  a  break,  but  in 
reality  the  two  men,  as  Luther  himself  clearly  recognised, 
were  of  an  altogether  different  spirit,  and  the  disagreement 
touching  the  Eucharist  was  only  the  symptom  of  a  far 
deeper  disagreement  concerning  the  nature  of  Chris- 
tianity and  the  way  of  salvation.  Zwingli's  humanistic 
sympathies  were  alien  to  Luther,  and  his  wider  interpre- 
tation of  the  gospel  was  contradictory  of  all  he  held  most 
dear.  From  Zwingli's  point  of  view  the  difference  was  of 
relatively  little  importance.  It  was  easy  for  him  to  be 
tolerant  in  his  treatment  of  Luther.  But  for  Luther  to 
tolerate  Zwingli  would  have  been  to  betray  the  very  heart 
of  his  gospel. 

Consistent  with  his  general  attitude  was  Zwingli's 
rehabilitation  of  natural  theology  which  Luther's  teaching 
had  threatened  with  destruction.  He  had  no  such  con- 
tempt for  the  natural  reason  as  Luther  had.  On  the 
contrary,  he  treated  it  with  the  greatest  respect  and  ac- 
corded it  a  large  place  in  the  discovery  of  religious  truth. 
The  Wittenberg  reformer  regarded  all  knowledge  of  God 
apart  from  Christ  as  vain  and  worthless.  Zwingli  laid 
great  emphasis  upon  it,  declaring  that  the  '  knowledge  of 
God  in  His  own  nature  precedes  the  knowledge  of  Christ.'  ^ 
Accordingly,    we    find    him    elaborating    a   philosophical 

1  See  letter  of  Melanchthon  to  Aquila  in  Corpus  Reformatorum,  vol.  ir. 
ool.  970.  «  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  180. 


68  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [en. 

theory  of  God  on  a  large  scale.  He  thought  of  the  Deity 
in  much  more  abstract  terms  than  Luther.  God  was  less 
a  personal  Father  than  the  Creator  and  Ruler  of  the  world, 
and  the  attributes  which  Zwingli  ascribed  to  Him  were 
those  of  traditional  theology,  omnipotence  and  omnisci- 
ence occup3ang  a  chief  place. ^  This  is  particularly  mani- 
fest in  connection  with  his  doctrine  of  predestination, 
which  finds  its  most  elaborate  and  systematic  expression 
in  his  De  Providentia  Dei.  His  acceptance  of  the  doctrine 
was  due  primarily  to  his  desire  to  undermine  all  depend- 
ence upon  human  merit  in  connection  with  salvation, 
but  having  accepted  it,  he  worked  over  his  doctrine  of 
God  in  its  light,  and  reached  a  metaphysical  determinism 
of  the  most  extreme  type,  which  became  controlling  in  all 
his  theological  teaching.  Luther  went  as  far  as  he  in  his 
assertion  of  the  inability  of  man  and  the  absolute  control 
of  God,  but  he  did  not  make  God's  omnipotence  the  centre 
of  his  system  as  Zwingli  did.  According  to  the  latter 
it  belongs  to  the  nature  of  God  to  be  eternally  active.  In 
reality  he  is  the  only  active  Being  in  the  universe.  He 
is  not  merely  the  first  cause,  but  the  only  cause.^  All 
activity  is  His  activity  ;  evil  as  well  as  good  is  His  work.^ 
If  this  be  not  admitted  His  power  is  limited,  and  He  is 
made  less  than  infinite.  He  is  above  all  law,  and  conse- 
quently, though  all  the  actions  of  men  are  His,  He  cannot 
do  wrong.  What  is  sin  to  them  who  are  under  law  is 
no  sin  to  Him.*  Not  only  the  deeds  of  all  men,  but  their 
destinies  as  well  are  determined  by  God.  He  predestines 
some  to  eternal  life  and  others  to  eternal  death,  that  He 
may  display  His  mercy  in  the  case  of  the  former,  and  His 
justice  in  the  case  of  the  latter.^  Zwingli's  doctrine  of 
predestination  was  more  than  a  mere  matter  of  abstract 
speculation.     It  acquired  practical  importance  by  being 

1  'We  call  God  Father,'  Zwingli  says,  'because  He  can  do  what  He  please* 
with  us  '  '  Works,  vol.  iv.  p.  96. 

8  Ibid.  pp.  108,  112  *  Ibid.  p.  112.  «>  Ibid.  p.  115. 


III.]  HULDKEICH  ZWINGLI  69 

given  a  fundamental  place  in  his  interpretation  of  the 
conditions  of  salvation.  The  ground  of  salvation  is  not 
faith  or  anything  else  in  man,  but  the  divine  election.^ 
'  The  elect  are  children  of  God,'  he  says,  '  even  before  they 
believe.'  ^  '  Election  precedes  faith,  and  so  it  comes  to 
pass  that  those  who  are  elect,  and  do  not  come  to  a  know- 
ledge of  the  faith,  as  e.g,  children,  nevertheless  attain 
eternal  blessedness,  for  it  is  election  which  makes  blessed.'  ^ 
This  gives  justification  and  consistency  to  his  contention 
that  even  heathen  who  have  never  heard  of  Christ  may 
be  among  the  number  of  the  saved;  they  may  be  sub- 
jects of  election  even  though  they  do  not  attain  to  Christian 
faith.  Thus  his  philosophical  theory  of  divine  omnipo- 
tence fell  in  with  his  humanistic  tendency  to  broaden  the 
range  of  God's  saving  activity  and  to  make  Him  inde- 
pendent of  the  ordinary  means  of  grace.  It  was  in  election 
that  Zwingli  found  the  ground  of  assurance,  which  he  was 
one  with  Luther  in  emphasising  as  absolutely  essential 
to  Christian  liberty,  and  so  to  genuinely  Christian  living. 
The  Christian  is  assured  of  salvation,  not  because  he 
believes  in  the  forgiving  love  of  God  revealed  in  Christ, 
but  because  he  is  conscious  of  his  election.  His  faith  is 
a  sure  sign  of  election ;  for  faith  is  given  only  to  the  pre- 
destinated.* But  faith  is  an  uncertain  and  variable  thing, 
and  only  the  eternal  and  unchanging  predestination  of 
God  is  an  adequate  basis  of  assurance. 

It  was  in  accordance  with  his  emphasis  upon  predestina- 
tion that  Zwingli  supplemented  his  earlier  notion  of  the 
Church  as  a  community  of  saints  with  Wyclif's  idea  of  it 
as  the  numerus  electorum,  or  totality  of  the  elect.^  As 
such  it  includes  heathen  as  well  as  Christians,  unbelievers 
as  well  as  believers,  infants  as  well  as  adults,  and  the  dead 

1  Cf.  Works,  vol.  vi.  part  i.  p.  340 ;  part  ii.  p.  106. 
«  Ibid.  vol.  iii.  p.  426. 

*  Ibid.  vol.  iv.  p.  123.  Zwingli  taught  the  salvation  of  all  infants  dying  in 
infancy  ;  cf.  p.  125  517. 

*  Ibid.  vol.  iv.  p.  122  ;  vol.  vi.  part  ii.  p.  166, 
»  Cf.  ibid.  vol.  iv.  p.  a 


70  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOKE  KANT  [ch. 

as  well  as  the  living.  Between  this  invisible  company 
and  the  visible  church  made  up  of  professing  Christians, 
there  is  no  necessary  connection.^  The  tendency  of  the 
notion  was  thus  to  take  all  real  significance  out  of  the 
latter,  and  to  give  it  a  much  less  important  place  than 
Luther  assigned  to  it.  At  this  point,  as  at  many  others, 
Zwingli  was  influenced  by  hostility  to  the  Anabaptists, 
who  were  strong  in  Switzerland,  and  whose  radical  views 
had  sufficient  kinship  with  Zwingli's  teaching  to  make 
him  particularly  sensitive  in  his  attitude  toward  them. 

It  is  evident  that  though  Zwingli  accepted  the  gospel 
of  Luther,  and  became  one  of  the  fathers  of  Protestantism, 
the  differences  between  him  and  the  Wittenberg  reformer 
were  many  and  far  reaching.  Though  he  came  to  his 
death  at  an  early  day  (1531),  and  though  the  influence  of 
other  men  soon  became  prominent  among  the  Protestants 
of  Western  Europe,  his  thinking  gave  permanent  direction 
to  their  theology.  Instead  of  giving  the  controlling  place 
in  Christian  thought  to  a  personal  religious  experience — 
the  consciousness  of  divine  forgiveness — he  gave  it  to  a 
theoretical  doctrine — the  absolute  and  unconditioned  will 
of  God.  Instead  of  viewing  the  Christian  life  as  the  free 
and  spontaneous  expression  of  gratitude  to  God,  he  con- 
ceived it  as  obedience  to  the  divine  will  revealed  in  the 
Scriptures.  Instead  of  finding  the  significance  of  the 
Bible  in  the  proclamation  of  the  gospel  of  God's  forgiving 
love  in  Christ,  he  found  it  in  its  revelation  of  the  divine 
will,  and  made  it  an  authoritative  code  for  the  government 
of  Christian  life  and  thought,  rather  than  a  means  of 
grace.  In  all  these  matters  the  reformed  wing  of 
Protestantism  followed  him  rather  than  Luther;  in  all 
of  them  the  distinctive  character  of  its  theology  is  clearly 
revealed.  From  the  beginning  it  has  been  more  external, 
objective,  and  legalistic,  and  in  so  far  more  Catholic}  than 
Lutheran  theology. 

1  Cf.  Woi'Jcs,  vol.  iv.  p.  10. 


IT.]  PHILIP  MELAis^CHTHON  71 


CHAPTER  IV 

PHILIP   MELANCHTHON 

The  creative  work  of  Luther  and  Zwingli  was  naturally 
followed  by  the  effort  to  formulate  and  systematise  their 
teachings.  In  the  Lutheran  camp  this  work  was  done 
chiefly  by  Melanchthon,  in  the  Reformed  by  Calvin.  Philip 
Melanchthon  was  born  in  South-western  Germany  in  1497, 
was  educated  at  Heidelberg  and  Tiibingen,  and  became 
Professor  of  Greek  in  the  University  of  Wittenberg  at  the 
age  of  twenty-one.  He  was  a  nephew  of  the  famous 
humanist,  Reuchlin,  and  from  the  beginning  was  thoroughly 
committed  to  the  cause  of  humanism.  He  was  a  precoci- 
ous genius,  and  when  he  came  to  Wittenberg  was  already 
recognised  as  one  of  the  rising  scholars  of  the  day.  His 
interests  were  not  simply  philological  and  literary,  but 
ethical  as  well.  Like  many  another  humanist,  he  was 
attracted  particularly  by  the  great  classical  moralists, 
and  found  in  their  ethical  teaching  inspiration  and  in- 
struction of  permanent  worth.  The  practical  interest 
was  always  controlling  with  him,  and  he  conceived  all 
study  vain  which  did  not  improve  the  character  as  well  as 
the  mind.  He  also  had  a  very  marked  pedagogical  in- 
stinct. The  title  of  Preceptor  of  Germany,  by  which 
he  ultimately  came  to  be  known  everywhere,  was  richly 
deserved.  He  was  the  greatest  teacher  of  his  day,  and 
did  more  than  any  one  else  to  improve  the  educational 
methods  of  Germany. 

He  did  not  go  to  Wittenberg  because  of  any  interest  he 


72  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

had  in  Luther  or  his  cause.  He  had  apparently  given 
no  special  thought  to  religious  matters.  His  studies  had 
lain  in  other  lines,  and  he  was  a  total  stranger  to  the  needs 
and  impulses  which  dominated  the  Augustinian  monk. 
But  he  soon  came  under  the  influence  of  Luther's  robust 
personality,  and  was  won  over  completely  to  his  support. 
He  recognised  the  Biblical  character  of  his  teaching  and 
the  great  advance  it  marked  upon  current  ethical  and 
religious  principles,  and  he  threw  himself  with  youthful 
enthusiasm  into  the  cause  of  reform  which  Luther  was 
championing.  He  remained  permanently  a  layman,  but 
at  Luther's  suggestion  took  the  degree  of  Bachelor  of 
Divinity  in  1519,  and  thereafter  gave  courses  in  theology, 
particularly  Biblical  exegesis,  as  well  as  in  the  classics 
and  kindred  subjects. 

Of  permanent  importance  for  Protestant  thought  was 
the  combination  in  Melanchthon,  the  first  great  Protestant 
theologian,  of  the  humanist  and  the  Lutheran.  In  his 
devotion  to  the  new  cause,  he  turned  his  back  for  a  time 
upon  some  of  his  humanistic  studies,  notably  Aristotle, 
and  spoke  in  contempt,  as  Luther  was  fond  of  doing,  of 
human  wisdom  and  the  pursuit  of  secular  learning.  But 
his  earlier  interests  soon  reasserted  themselves  and  he 
made  it  thenceforth  one  of  the  aims  of  his  life  to  combine 
and  reconcile  the  gospel  of  Luther  with  the  conclusions 
of  natural  reason.  Had  he  not  come  under  Luther's  in- 
fluence, he  would  doubtless  have  remained  a  mere  human- 
ist. As  it  was,  he  put  his  humanistic  training  and 
acquisitions  completely  at  the  service  of  Luther's  gospel, 
placing  the  latter  in  a  large  setting,  and  bringing  it  so 
far  as  he  could  into  harmony  with  the  best  thought  and 
learning  of  the  day. 

In  1521  he  published  the  first  edition  of  his  famous 
Loci  Communes.  In  later  editions  the  work  became  an 
elaborate  system  of  theology,  but  in  its  original  form  it 
was    simply  a    concise    statement    of    the    fundamental 


IV.]  PHILIP  MELANCHTHON"  73 

principles  of  Luther's  gospel,  with  a  discussion  of  certain 
practical  matters  affected  by  it.  Doctrines  which  had 
no    direct    bearing    upon    life    were    omitted    altogether. 

*  This  is  Christian  knowledge,'  he  says,  '  to  know  what 
the  law  demands,  where  you  may  find  power  for  doing 
the  law,  and  grace  for  sin,  how  you  may  strengthen  the 
feeble  mind  against  the  devil,  the  flesh,  and  the  world, 
how  you  may  console  an  afflicted  conscience.  ...  In 
his  epistle  to  the  Romans,  when  he  wrote  a  compendium 
of  Christian  doctrine,  did  Paul  philosophise  concerning 
the  mysteries  of  the  Trinity,  the  mode  of  the  Incarnation, 
creation,  active,  and  passive  ?  A^Tiat  did  he  deal  with  ? 
Truly  with  the  law,  sin,  and  grace,  upon  which  subjects 
alone  the  knowledge  of  Christ  depends.  ...  So  we  will  de- 
lineate the  reason  of  those  matters  which  commend  Christ 
to  thee,  which  confirm  the  conscience,  which  strengthen 
the  mind  against  Satan.'  ^ 

The  work  is  true  to  the  teaching  of  Luther  from  begin- 
ning to  end,  and  contains  a  great  many  beautiful  state- 
ments of  one  and  another  feature  of  his  gospel.  Some  of 
the  definitions  are  unsurpassed  for  conciseness  and  clear- 
ness in  all  theological  literature.  *  Grace  is  nothing  else 
than    the    forgiveness    or    remission    of    sins'    (p.    170). 

*  Faith  is  nothing  else  than  trust  in  the  divine  mercy 
promised  in  Christ '  (p.  175).  '  The  gospel  is  the  promise 
of  grace  or  the  forgiveness  of  sins  through  Christ '  (p.  210). 

*  We  are  Justified,  therefore,  when,  having  been  mortified 
through  the  law,  we  are  raised  by  the  word  of  grace, 
which  is  promised  in  Christ,  or  the  gospel  of  the  forgiveness 
of  sins,  and  cleave  to  it  in  faith,  doubting  not  at  all  that 
the  righteousness  of  Christ  is  our  righteousness,  the  satis- 
faction of  Christ  our  expiation,  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
our  resurrection.  In  short,  doubting  not  at  all  that  our 
sins  are  forgiven,  and  God  now  favours  us  and  wishes  us 
well.    Not    our    works,    therefore,    however    good    they 

1  Plitt-Kolde's  edition  of  the  Loci,  p.  64  sq. 


74  JPEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

may  seem  to  be,  constitute  righteousness,  but  only  faith 
in  the  mercy  and  grace  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ '  (p.  170). 
*  Whatever  is  done  by  the  powers  of  nature  is  carnal ; 
the  constancy  of  Socrates,  the  moderation  of  Zeno  are 
nothing  but  carnal  affections  '  (p.  112).  '  The  law  demands 
impossible  things,  the  love  of  God  and  one's  neighbour. 
.  .  .  Therefore  it  is  not  the  work  of  the  law  to  justify, 
but  it  is  its  proper  work  to  reveal  sin  and  confound  the 
conscience  '  (p.  208  fp.).  '  So  far  as  we  believe  we  are  free, 
so  far  as  we  disbeheve  we  are  under  law  '  (p.  217).  Such 
brief  and  pregnant  sentences  show  clearly  enough  that 
Melanchthon  had  made  his  own  the  very  heart  of  Luther's 
gospel. 

And  yet  there  are  significant  differences  even  in  this 
early  work.  Melanchthon's  pedagogic  concern  reveals 
itself  frequently  in  his  care  in  guarding  against  possible 
misunderstandings  of  Luther  which  may  lead  to  practical 
abuses  of  one  kind  and  another.  His  controlling  ethical 
interest  also  appears  over  and  over  again,  particularly 
in  his  discussion  of  the  place  and  province  of  law, 
where  he  is  very  careful  to  insist  upon  the  holiness  of 
the  Christian  life,  and  to  repudiate  libertinism  of  every 
sort. 

There  is  also  a  complete  lack  of  reference  to  Luther's 
distinction  between  the  Word  of  God  and  the  Scriptures. 
No  doctrine  of  the  Bible  is  given,  but  it  is  quoted  as  if  all 
its  parts  were  of  equal  authority,  and  it  is  evident  that 
Melanchthon  so  conceived  the  matter.  This  was  entirely 
natural  under  the  circumstances.  His  lack  of  a  religious 
experience  like  Luther's,  and  his  pedagogic  concern  for 
the  moral  welfare  of  his  readers  made  some  external 
authority  necessary.  That  it  should  be  the  Scriptures 
was  inevitable,  both  for  the  humanist  and  for  the  follower 
of  Luther.  The  supreme  authority  of  the  Bible  was  thus 
a  fundamental  postulate  with  him  from  the  beoinning. 

If  we  would  rightly  estimate  Melanchthon's  influcmce 


IV.]  PHILIP  MELANCHTHON  75 

upon  Protestant  theology,  we  must  not  confine  our  atten- 
tion to  tlie  first  edition  of  his  Loci.  The  later  revisions, 
which  appeared  in  1535  and  following  years,  were  of  much 
greater  historical  significance.  Wliile  the  original  edition 
was  not  intended  to  be  a  work  on  dogmatic  theology,  the 
second  and  following  were  avowedly  such.  The  doctrines 
of  God,  the  divine  Unity  and  Trinity,  the  two  natures  in 
Christ,  and  the  mode  of  the  incarnation,  omitted  in  the 
original  work  because  without  direct  bearing  on  the 
practical  life,  are  all  discussed  at  length  in  the  later 
editions.  The  gospel  of  Luther,  which  stood  out  so  promin- 
ently and  beautifully  in  the  former  was  thus  obscured, 
and  the  way  opened  to  the  scholastic  notion  that  the 
importance  of  a  doctrine  depends  on  its  place  in  the 
system  rather  than  on  its  practical  value.  Though  his 
ethical  interest  kept  Melanchthon  from  becoming  purely 
scholastic,  and  giving  himself  wholly  to  barren  specula- 
tion, there  was  a  great  deal  of  scholasticism  in  his  later 
Loci,  both  in  spirit  and  in  method,  and  the  work  grew  less 
vital  and  attractive  with  each  successive  revision. 

Again,  the  influence  of  his  humanistic  training  had  an 
increasing  effect  on  Melanchthon's  religious  thinking. 
When  he  wrote  his  original  Loci  he  was  largely  under 
the  control  of  Luther's  anti-humanistic  spirit.  He  shared 
his  contempt  for  the  natural  reason,  and  made  the  Bible 
the  sole  source  of  theology.  But  as  time  went  on  his 
humanism  reasserted  itself,  and  he  repudiated  Luther's 
sharp  dualism  between  reason  and  revelation,  and  under- 
took to  commend  the  truths  of  revelation  to  the  natural 
reason,  and  to  show  their  harmony  with  it  as  the  mediaeval 
schoolmen  had  done.  He  did  not  go  as  far  as  they,  but 
the  tendency  was  similar.  The  result  w^as  the  modifica- 
tion of  some  of  Luther's  extreme  views,  notably  his  doctrine 
of  predestination  and  of  the  real  presence  in  the  Eucharist, 
but  more  important  than  this,  the  placing  of  reason  and 
revelation  beside  one  another  as  the  two  sources  for  a 


76  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

knowledge  of  religious  truth  and  the  recognition  of  natural 
and  revealed  theology  as  together  making  up  the  sum 
of  Christian  faith.  The  natural  theology  which  he  ac- 
cepted was  the  common  traditional  thing,  involving  a 
purely  mechanical  view  of  the  universe.  The  revealed 
theology  was  that  of  the  three  ecumenical  creeds,  with 
the  fuller  and  clearer  exposition  of  Scripture  found  in  the 
teaching  of  Luther,  and  particularly  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession. 

Melanchthon's  recognition  of  reason  and  revelation  as 
co-ordinate  sources  of  theology  gave  the  scheme  for  all 
subsequent  Protestant  dogmatics.  Natural  theology  pre- 
pares the  way  for  revealed,  and  hence  the  study  of  the 
sciences  precedes  the  study  of  the  Bible  and  promotes 
the  true  faith.  Reason  and  revelation  cannot  be  out  of 
harmony.  Revelation  does  not  contradict  natural  theo- 
logy, it  supplements  it.  The  full  knowledge  adequate 
for  salvation,  that  is,  the  knowledge  of  the  gospel,  comes 
only  with  revelation,  but  it  presupposes  an  acquaintance 
with  God  and  His  works  open  to  all.  The  tendency  was 
thus  to  view  Christianity  as  a  purely  intellectual  matter, 
as  a  supernatural  communication  of  divine  knowledge. 
Melanchthon  did  not  lose  the  sense  of  the  vital  and  experi- 
mental character  of  the  Christian  faith ;  it  meant  to  him, 
as  to  Luther,  the  conviction  of  sins  forgiven  and  personal 
trust  in  a  loving  Father.  But  the  effect  of  his  teaching 
was  to  obscure  this  conception  and  promote  the  idea  that 
the  gospel  is  simply  a  system  of  truths  which  it  is  our  duty 
to  accept.  Accordingly  the  later  editions  of  the  Loci 
contain  a  formal  apologetic  for  Christianity  as  a  divinely 
revealed  philosophy.  The  antiquity  of  the  Christian  re- 
velation, which  includes  the  Old  Testament,  the  excel- 
lence of  its  doctrine,  the  continued  existence  of  the  Church, 
in  spite  of  the  hostility  of  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil, 
the  attestation  by  miracles — all  these  are  cited  in  support 
of  the  gospel  in  good  traditional  fashion. 


IV.]  PHILIP  MELANCHTHON  77 

In  accordance  with  his  intellectual  notion  of  Christianity, 
Melanchthon  widened  the  idea  of  saving  faith  to  cover  the 
acceptance  of  all  the  truths  of  divine  revelation.  Not 
simply  the  gospel  of  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ  is  the 
object  of  the  Christian's  faith,  but  the  whole  Bible  as 
interpreted  by  the  three  ecumenical  creeds,  and  by  the 
teaching  of  Luther.  Accordingly  sound  doctrine  is  made 
one  of  the  notes  of  the  true  Church.  The  Church  is  com- 
posed '  of  those  who  hold  pure  doctrine  and  agree  in  it.'  ^ 
Upon  the  orthodoxy  of  the  evangelical  church  he  laid 
the  very  greatest  stress;  it  is  truly  Catholic  because  it 
accepts  the  prophetic  and  apostolic  teaching  according 
to  the  opinion  of  the  true  Church.  '  Thus  in  our  con- 
fession we  profess  that  we  embrace  the  whole  teaching 
of  the  word  of  God,  to  which  the  Church  gives  testimony, 
and,  indeed,  in  that  sense  which  the  symbols  show.'  ^  He 
meant  here  the  ecumenical  symbols,  that  is,  the  Apostles', 
the  Nicene,  and  the  Athanasian  Creeds,  and  the  agreement 
with  the  tradition  of  the  Church  which  he  claimed  for 
Protestant  doctrine  was  agreement  with  the  ancient,  un- 
divided Church.  He  was  always  conservative,  sometimes 
timidly  so,  and  his  conservatism  expressed  itself  particu- 
larly in  emphasis  upon  the  traditional  character  of  the 
evangelical  faith.  '  In  the  true  faith,'  he  says,  '  I  include 
the  whole  doctrine  handed  down  in  the  books  of  the 
prophets  and  apostles,  and  comprehended  in  the  Apostles', 
Nicene,  and  Athanasian  creeds.'  '  We  have  brought 
into  the  Church  no  new  dogma,  but  we  renew  and  illustrate 
the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  Church.'  ^  The  reactionary 
and  Catholic  character  of  all  this  is  abundantly  evident. 
It  is  not  that  Melanchthon  took  positions  wholly  foreign 
to  Luther's,  but  that  what  with  Luther  was  exceptional, 
and  due  principally  to  controversy,  with  Melanchthon  was 
habitual  and  controlling. 

1  Corpus  Reformainrum,  vol.  xi.  p.  273.  ^  md.  vol.  xxiv.  p.  398. 

8  Ibid.  vol.  iii.  p.  222. 


78  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

Closely  connected  with  the  rehabilitation  of  natural 
theology,  referred  to  above,  was  Melanchthon's  loss  of 
the  distinction  between  law  and  gospel  which  meant 
so  much  to  Luther,  and  which  was  brought  out  so 
clearly  and  admirably  in  the  first  edition  of  the  Loci. 
In  the  later  editions  reason  is  associated  with  law  and 
revelation  with  gospel.  By  natural  reason  we  gain  a 
knowledge  of  law,  by  revelation  a  knowledge  of  the  gospel. 
As  natural  reason  is  not  superseded  but  supplemented  by 
revelation,  the  law  is  not  superseded  but  supplemented 
by  the  gospel,  and  is  therefore  permanently  binding 
upon  believers  as  well  as  unbelievers.  Melanchthon  did 
not  return  to  the  Roman  Catholic  position  and  make  the 
observance  of  the  law  a  condition  of  salvation  in  the  same 
sense  as  faith,  but  he  introduced  a  view  of  the  law  which 
tended  to  do  away  altogether  with  Luther's  principle  of 
Christian  liberty.  He  avoided  the  difficulty  involved  in 
asserting  the  Christian's  bondage  to  the  law,  and  at  the 
same  time  denying  that  it  has  saving  value,  by  drawing 
a  scholastic  distinction  between  justification  and  regenera- 
tion. The  Christian  is  justified  on  the  ground  of  faith 
alone,  but  justification  must  be  followed  by  regeneration 
through  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit.  Only  as  the  Spij-it 
takes  possession  of  the  justified  man  and  enables  him  to 
keep  the  law  of  God  is  he  truly  saved. ^  This  means,  in 
fact  if  not  in  form,  a  return  to  the  Catholic  conception  of 
salvation  as  a  transformation  of  character.  The  ethical 
interest  becomes  again  predominant,  and  though  Luther's 
position  is  nominally  maintained,  it  is  really  abandoned. 
The  Christian  life  is  once  more  made  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  a  probation  for  the  life  to  come,  and  the  magnifi- 
cent liberty  of  the  Christian  man  is  little  better  than  an 
empty  phrase. 

I  have  spoken  of  Melanchthon  as  a  formulator  of 
Lutheran  theology.     His  character  in  this  regard  appears 

^  Cf.  Corpus  Reformatoruw.,  vol.  xxi.  p.  428  aq. 


IV.]  PHILIP  MELANCHTHON  79 

not  only  in  the  successive  editions  of  his  Loci  but  also  in  the 
Augsburg  Confession  and  in  the  Apology  for  it,  both  of  which 
were  prepared  by  him.  The  former  was  the  earliest 
confessional  statement  of  Protestant  doctrine.  It  was 
drawn  up  in  1530  and  presented  to  the  Emperor  at  the 
Diet  of  Augsburg  of  that  year  as  a  vindication  and  defence 
of  the  Protestant  position.  It  was  not  intended  as  a 
symbol  for  the  use  of  the  Protestants  themselves,  but  as  a 
statement  of  their  faith  which  should  induce  the  Emperor 
to  think  better  of  them  than  he  did.  Under  these  circum- 
stances the  Confession  was  naturally  framed  in  such  a 
way  as  to  magnify  the  agreements  and  minimise  the  dis- 
agreements between  Protestants  and  Catholics.  It  is 
claimed  that  the  Protestants  hold  the  faith  of  the  ancient 
Fathers,  and  that  the  differences  between  them  and  the 
Catholics  are  due  to  mediaeval  corruptions,  which  they 
repudiate.  The  effort  is  made,  of  course,  to  show  that  those 
for  whom  Melanchthon  is  speaking  are  not  guilty  of  the 
innumerable  heresies  that  have  been  charged  upon  them 
by  the  Catholics,  and  to  this  end  the  views  of  the  radical 
Protestants,  such  as  the  Zwinglians  and  Anabaptists,  are 
emphatically^  denounced  at  every  possible  point. 

The  Confession,  so  far  as  it  went,  was  a  true  statement  of 
Lutheran  doctrine.  Though  prepared  by  Melanchthon  it 
did  not  show  the  departure  from  Luther's  teaching  which 
marked  the  later  editions  of  the  Loci.  It  was  brief  and  to 
the  point,  and  was  free  from  the  scholasticism  found  there. 
But  it  was  not  such  a  confession  as  Luther  would  have 
written.  He  would  have  expressed  himself  in  a  more 
outspoken  and  polemic  fashion,  and  would  have  emphasised 
the  differences  rather  than  the  agreements  between  himself 
and  the  Catholics,  as  he  did,  for  instance,  in  the  '  Smalcald 
Articles,'  composed  half  a  dozen  years  later. 

The  Confession  dealt  with  doctrine  in  twenty-one  brief 
articles,  and  then  with  practical  abuses  needing  reforma- 
tion in  seven  longer  ones,  which  made  up  two- thirds  of  the 


80  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

whole  document.  The  doctrinal  part  closed  with  the  state- 
ment that  the  chief  differences  between  Protestants  and 
Catholics  were  not  theological — here  there  was  general 
agreement — but  practical.  '  This  is  about  the  sum  of 
doctrine  among  us,  in  which  can  be  seen  that  there  is 
nothing  which  is  discrepant  with  the  Scriptures,  or  with  the 
Church  Catholic,  or  even  with  the  Roman  Church,  so  far 
as  that  Church  is  known  from  writers.  This  being  the 
case,  they  judge  us  harshly  who  insist  that  we  be  regarded 
as  heretics.  But  the  dissension  is  concerning  certain 
traditions  and  abuses,  which  without  any  sure  authority 
have  crept  into  the  churches.'  ^  '  Those  things  only  have 
been  enumerated  which  it  seemed  necessary  to  say,  that 
it  might  be  understood  that  in  doctrine  and  ceremonials 
among  us  there  is  nothing  received  contrary  to  Scriptures 
or  to  the  Catholic  Church,  inasmuch  as  it  is  manifest  that 
we  have  diligently  taken  heed  that  no  new  and  godless 
doctrines  should  creep  into  our  churches.'  ^ 

Before  turning  from  Melanchthon,  it  may  be  well  to 
call  attention  to  the  resemblance  at  many  points  be- 
tween him  and  Zwingli,  Both  had  the  same  conception 
of  the  authority  of  the  Bible,  of  the  relation  of  natural  and 
revealed  theology,  of  the  oneness  of  law  and  gospel,  and  of 
the  nature  of  faith.  Zwingli  was  not  as  scholastic  as 
Melanchthon ;  he  was  more  of  an  originator  and  less  of 
a  formulator.  But,  except  in  the  matter  of  predestina- 
tion, where  Melanchthon's  later  views  were  very  different, 
their  general  tendency  was  strikingly  similar.  This  was 
apparently  due,  not  to  the  influence  of  the  one  over  the 
other,  but  to  the  fact  that  they  came  to  evangelical 
Christianity,  not  through  a  profound  religious  experience 
like  Luther's,  but  through  the  conviction  that  his  gospel 
was  Biblical  and  therefore  true.  In  this  they  anticipated 
the  course  very  commonly  taken  since  their  day. 

I  Part  i.  art.  22.  *  Part  ii,  conclusion. 


v.l     -  JOHN  CALVIN  81 


CHAPTER  V 

JOHN  CALVIN^ 

Although  Zwingli  was  the  founder  of  what  may  be  called 
the  reformed  type  of  theology,  and  Calvin  its  great  formu- 
lator,  the  relation  between  the  two  men  was  very  different 
from  that  between  Luther  and  Melanchthon,  the  founder 
and  the  formulator  of  Lutheran  theology.  In  the  case  of 
the  German  reformers,  the  younger  was  the  devoted 
disciple  of  the  older,  and  even  when  in  course  of  time  he 
deviated  at  some  points  from  the  teaching  of  his  master, 
he  remained  a  reverent  follower.  Calvin,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  never  consciously  a  disciple  of  Zwingli.  His 
conversion  to  Protestantism  occurred  after  Zwingli's 
death,  and  independently  of  his  influence.  He  regarded 
Zwingli  with  respect,^  but  he  spoke  rather  slightingly  of 
him  on  more  than  one  occasion,^  as  he  did  for  that  matter 
of  most  of  his  contemporaries,  and  in  a  letter  to  Farel,* 
written  in  1540,  he  declared  Luther  to  be  a  much  greater 
man.  In  fact,  he  always  regarded  Luther  as  his  spiritual 
father,  and  recognised  him  as  the  greatest  of  the  reformers. 
At  the  same  time  Calvin's  theology  was  in  no  small 
measure  identical  with  Zwingli's  and  the  identity  was 
not  a  mere  accident.  It  was  due,  in  part,  to  similarity 
of  circumstances  and  situation,  but  in  part  also  to  the 
influence    of   Zwingli's    thinking.      That    influence    was 

1  Calvin's  'Works'  are  published  in  the  Corpus  Eeformatorum,  vol.  xxix. 
sq.  The  volumes  are  also  uumbered  independently  (vols.  i,-lix.),  and  are  so 
referred  to  in  this  chapter. 

2  Cf.  e.g.  Opera,  vol.  viii.  p.  182 ;  vol.  xii.  p.  11. 

«  Ibid.  vol.  xi.  pp.  36,  438.  *  Ibid.  Tol.  xi.  p.  44. 

F 


82  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

apparently  not  direct,  but  it  was  none  the  less  potent. 
The  Zurich  reformer  had  a  large  following,  both  in  Switzer- 
land and  in  South-western  Germany.  His  notion  of  the 
Eucharist,  even  where  not  itself  accepted,  had  led  to  a 
considerable  modification  of  the  Lutheran  doctrine  as  held 
by  the  Protestants  of  that  region,  and  his  predestinarian 
views  had  become  common  property  among  them.  In 
his  theory  of  predestination,  as  already  seen,  he  was 
moved,  not  only  by  Luther's  practical  interest,  but  also 
by  a  theological  motive  which  the  Wittenberg  reformer 
did  not  share,  and  he  carried  the  theory  further  than  Luther 
did,  and  gave  it  a  more  controlling  place  in  his  thinking. 
But  there  was  no  inconsistency  at  this  point  between  his 
teaching  and  Luther's,  and  it  was  natural  that  his  more 
logical  and  thoroughgoing  treatment  of  the  matter  should 
commend  itself  to  that  part  of  the  world  where  he  was 
known  and  revered.  His  De  Providentia,  in  which  his 
doctrine  received  its  most  extreme  statement,  was  warmly 
praised  by  Bucer,  Myconius,  Judas,  and  others,  and  the 
doctrine  itself  was  recognised  as  an  essential  part  of  the 
Protestant  faith. 

The  most  prominent  theologian  in  South-western 
Germany,  who  had  more  than  any  one  else  to  do  with  the 
spread  of  a  modified  form  of  Zwinglianism  in  that  part 
of  the  country,  was  Martin  Bucer,  the  celebrated  S trass- 
burg  reformer.^  It  was  Luther's  work  and  teaching  that 
won  him  to  Protestantism,  but  he  early  came  into  communi- 
cation with  Zwingli,  and  felt  the  influence  of  his  thought. 
He  was  a  man  of  unionistic  tendencies,  and  made  it  one  of 
his  chief  concerns  to  overcome  differences,  and  to  promote 
harmony  between  the  divergent  factions  of  Protestantism. 
To  this  end  he  formulated  a  Eucharistic  doctrine  which 
he  thought  conserved  all  that  Luther  was  really  interested 

1  See  Lang's  Der  Evangelien-Kommentar  Martin  Butzers  und  die 
Grundzilge  seiner  Theologie  {Studien  zur  Qeschichte  der  Theologie  und 
der  Kirche,  ii.  2),  1900. 


v.]  JOHN  CALVIN  83 

in,  while  avoiding  the  materialistic  noticin  so  repugnant 
to  ZwingH.  He  emphasised  the  significance  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  as  a  testimony  to  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ, 
and  while  denying  the  material  presence,  he  taught  a 
spiritual  presence  which  guaranteed  participation  in  the 
body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  by  the  believing  participant. 
His  efforts  to  bring  about  a  permanent  union  between  the 
two  parties  were  unsuccessful,  but  his  compromise  view 
of  the  Lord's  Supper  was  widely  accepted  and  ultimately 
became  predominant  throughout  the  Reformed  wing  of 
Protestantism. 

In  his  predestinarian  ideas,  Bucer  agreed  with  Zwingli, 
but  he  made  more  of  the  conception  of  the  glory  of  God 
which  is  found  in  Zwingli's  writings,  but  is  not  prominent 
there.  God's  glory  appears  chiefly  in  His  omnipotence,  by 
which  He  rules  and  governs  all  things,  and  it  is  the  ultimate 
ground  of  predestination  both  to  salvation  and  to  con- 
demnation. Zwingli  commonly  made  the  good  of  the 
creature  the  controlling  motive  in  all  divine  activity,  but 
in  his  work.  On  Providence,  in  the  passage  already  referred 
to,  he  spoke  of  election  as  a  manifestation  of  divine  mercy 
and  of  reprobation  as  a  manifestation  of  divine  justice.^ 
By  Bucer  this  idea  was  made  controlling,  and  the  motive 
of  predestination  was  represented,  not  as  the  good  of  the 
creature,  but  as  the  exhibition  of  the  glory  of  God.  To 
this  end  God  decreed  the  Fall,  and  to  the  same  end  He 
determined  to  save  some  out  of  the  mass  of  perdition  and 
to  condemn  the  rest  to  eternal  punishment  for  their  sins. 

The  principal  importance  of  Bucer  in  the  history  of 
Protestant  thought  is  due  to  the  fact  that  he  influenced 
the  great  Genevan  reformer,  Jolin  Calvin,  and  through 
him  affected  permanently  the  theology  of  the  reformed 
churches. 

Calvin  was  bom  at  Noyon  in  North-eastern  France 
in  1509.  His  father  at  first  intended  him  for  a  clerical 
1  Opera,  voL  iv.  p.  115. 


84  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

career,  but  afterwards  changed  his  plan  and  set  him  to 
studying  law.  He  completed  his  legal  studies,  but  found 
the  pursuit  of  classical  literature  more  to  his  taste,  and  in 
1532  published  a  commentary  on  Seneca's  De  dementia, 
which  gave  striking  proof,  both  of  his  extraordinary 
scholarship  and  of  his  profound  ethical  interest.  He  had 
a  naturally  religious  disposition,  but  there  is  no  sign  that 
he  was  particularly  concerned  about  religious  matters 
until  1533,  when  we  find  him  one  of  a  little  group  of  re- 
forming spirits  in  Paris.  He  had  already,  like  many 
others  in  France,  begun  to  feel  the  influence  of  Luther's 
teaching,  but  it  was  apparently  some  time  before  he  re- 
cognised himself  as  a  Protestant.  The  circumstances 
of  his  conversion  to  the  new  faith  are  quite  unknown. 
There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  he  passed  through  a 
spiritual  struggle  like  Luther's.  It  would  seem  rather 
that  he  was  drawn  naturally,  perhaps  almost  insensibly, 
by  his  associations  into  sympathy  with  the  humanistic 
reforming  ideas  which  were  abroad  in  France  as  elsewhere, 
and  which  made  much  of  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures 
and  a  return  to  the  greater  simplicity  and  spirituality  of 
primitive  days.  From  this  position  he  was  carried  over 
into  Protestantism  by  his  conviction  that  Luther  and  his 
followers  had  the  Bible  on  their  side,  and  that  the  visible 
Roman  Catholic  institution  in  which  he  had  been  brought 
up  was  not  identical  with  the  true  Church. 

In  1534  he  gave  up  his  ecclesiastical  benefices,  which 
he  had  held  since  boyhood,  and  thenceforth  had  no  con- 
nection with  the  Church  of  Rome.  France  being  unsafe, 
or  at  any  rate  uncomfortable  territory  for  a  Protestant, 
he  made  his  way  to  Basel  in  1535,  and  there,  in  1536, 
published  the  first  edition  of  his  famous  Institutes  of  the 
Christian  Religion,  with  a  dedicatory  letter  to  King 
Francis  i.  in  which  he  defended  evangelical  Christianity 
in   a  masterly   fashion.^    The   book   and   the   letter  ac- 

1  Publish/sd  in  Calvin's  Opera,  vol.  i. 


v.]  JOHN  CALVIN  85 

companying  it  at  once  brought  him  mto  prominence  and 
marked  him  as  a  rising  leader  in  the  Protestant  cause. 

The  work  was  intended  as  an  introduction  to  the  study 
of  the  Bible  for  the  use  of  theological  students,  and 
particularly  as  an  apology  for  Protestantism  in  the  form 
of  a  brief  and  popular  presentation  of  its  teachings,  especi- 
ally upon  practical  matters.  It  followed  rather  closely 
the  order  of  Luther's  Catechism,  and  while  much  more 
elaborate  and  doctrinal  in  character,  contained  little 
theology  in  the  strict  sense.  It  was  divided  into  six 
chapters  :  the  first  on  the  law,  with  an  exposition  of  the 
Decalogue ;  the  second  on  faith,  with  an  exposition  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed  ;  the  third  on  prayer,  with  an  exposition 
of  the  Lord's  Prayer  ;  the  fourth  on  the  sacraments  of 
Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  ;  the  fifth,  the  most  polemic 
of  all,  on  the  other  so-called  sacraments  ;  and  the  sixth 
on  Christian  liberty,  ecclesiastical  power,  and  civil  ad- 
ministration. 

In  this  little  book  the  doctrine  of  predestination  is  re- 
ferred to  in  passing,  but  though  it  appears  in  its  double 
form,  as  election  and  reprobation,  it  is  evident  that  Calvin 
was  interested  only  in  the  former,  not  the  latter,  and  that 
it  was  important  to  him  because  it  guaranteed  the  sole 
activity  of  God  in  the  work  of  redemption,  and  also  be- 
cause it  gave  an  adequate  basis  for  the  assurance  of  salva- 
tion. There  is  nothing  pecuHar  in  the  doctrine  as  ex- 
pressed in  this  work.  It  was  a  common  reformation 
belief,  and  seemed  to  Calvin,  as  to  most  Protestants,  a 
necessary  accompaniment  of  the  doctrine  of  salvation  by 
faith  alone,  and  the  only  adequate  safeguard  against  the 
Catholic  theory  of  human  merit  with  all  that  it  involved. 

In  a  second  and  greatly  enlarged  edition  of  the  In- 
stitutes} which  appeared  in  1539,  while  Calvin  was  residing 
in  Strassburg,  a  special  chapter  was  given  to  the  subject 

1  Published  in  Opera,  vol.  i.  A  French  translation  of  this  edition  WM 
made  by  Calvin  himself  in  1541. 


86  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

of  predestination  (chapter  xiv.),  and  the  doctrine  assumed 
the  character  which  it  permanently  bore  in  his  teaching. 
In  the  first  edition  it  was  denied  that  God  is  the  author 
of  sin,  but  in  the  second  His  agency  in  effecting  the  Fall 
and  all  the  actions  of  men  of  whatever  sort  is  explicitly 
asserted.  Moreover,  His  own  glory  is  represented  as  the 
controlling  motive  in  the  predestinating  activity  of  God. 
The  explanation  of  this  change  is  to  be  found  in  the  influ- 
ence of  Bucer,  whose  Commentary  on  Romans,  in  which 
his  doctrine  of  predestination  received  its  fullest  statement, 
appeared  in  1536.  Calvin,  who  was  already  an  admirer 
of  the  Strassburg  reformer,  was  greatly  impressed  by  it, 
and  was  led  to  put  his  emphasis  where  Bucer  did.  The 
likeness  between  his  own  discussion  and  Bucer's  is  very 
striking.^  There  is  the  same  assertion  that  God's  will 
is  the  cause  of  all  things,  and  that  there  is  nothing  back 
of  it  or  above  it  controlling  or  determining  it ;  the  same 
repudiation  of  the  notion  of  a  permissive  decree  in 
connection  with  the  Fall ;  the  same  emphasis  on  the 
Biblical  basis  of  the  doctrine,  and  the  same  caution  against 
being  wise  beyond  what  is  written.  There  are  also  the 
same  answers  to  objections  :  Who  is  man  that  he  should 
call  God  to  account  ?  He  is  quite  incompetent  to  fathom 
the  will  of  God  or  to  pass  judgment  on  His  acts.  Whatever 
the  Ruler  of  the  world  does  is  just  and  right,  whether  it 
squares  with  our  notions  or  not. 

Calvin's  temperament  and  religious  experience  were 
both  such  as  to  make  Bucer's  doctrine  congenial.  Even 
before  he  became  a  Protestant  he  recognised  the  nothing- 
ness of  man  and  the  overmastering  power  of  God.  The 
thought  of  divine  sovereignty  was  always  dear,  and  his 
religious  devotion  instinctively  expressed  itself  in  magnify- 
ing the  divine  omnipotence.  In  his  dedicatory  letter  to 
the  king,  accompanying  the  first  edition  of  his  Institutes, 
he  had  a  great  deal  to  say  about  the  glory  of  God,  which 

1  See  Lang,  ibid.  p.  339  sq. 


v.]  JOHN  CALVIN  87 

was  evidently  already  a  favourite  idea.  It  is  not  surpris- 
ing that  he  made  Bucer's  doctrine  his  own,  and  followed 
him  in  connecting  divine  predestination  directly  with  the 
divine  glory,  and  in  emphasising  God's  activity  in  bringing 
about  the  Fall. 

The  significance  of  Calvin's  presentation  of  the  doctrine 
is  not  that  he  added  anything  to  Bucer's  teaching  or 
differed  with  him  at  any  point,  nor  even  that  with  his 
logical  mind  he  stated  it  more  clearly  and  consistently, 
but  that  he  made  it  an  integral  part  of  a  complete  system 
of  theology,  and  inserted  it  in  his  Institutes,  which  was  to 
become  the  theological  text-book  of  all  western  Protestant- 
ism. The  importance  of  this  fact  should  not  be  under- 
estimated. Standing  by  itself,  the  doctrine  of  absolute 
and  unconditioned  predestination  would  probably  not  long 
have  found  general  acceptance,  and  would  unquestionably 
have  been  crowded  into  the  background  by  other  interests, 
as  in  Lutheranism.  But  Calvin  gave  it  an  essential  place 
in  a  system  whose  controlling  principle  was  the  majesty 
and  might  of  God.  As  a  result  to  reject  or  even  to  mini- 
mise it  seemed  to  hmit  God  and  throw  contempt  upon  Him. 
The  imposing  character  of  the  system  as  formulated  by 
Calvin  gave  it  compelling  power,  and  that  he  was  not  the 
creator  of  the  doctrine  of  predestination,  and  that  he 
added  nothing  to  it,  does  not  in  any  way  detract  from  his 
credit  for  its  almost  universal  acceptance  and  dominat- 
ing influence  in  western  Protestantism. 

Calvin's  doctrine  of  God  occupied  the  same  central  place 
in  his  system  as  in  Zwingh's.  But  while  it  resembled 
closely  the  earher  reformer's  doctrine,  it  was  less  profound 
and  was  worked  out  with  less  consistency.  To  the 
Genevan  reformer  God  is  a  strictly  personal  Beiug  whose 
will  controls  the  universe ;  to  Zwingli  He  is  the  only 
real  Being,  the  all-pervading  energy  and  the  immanent 
cause  of  all  things.  The  practical  effects  are  the  same, 
but  the  philosophical  basis  is  different,  or  rather  it  should 


88  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

be  said  that  while  ZwingH's  is  a  philosophical  theory, 
Calvin's  is  theological  only.  The  younger  reformer  had 
apparently  no  philosophical  interest,  and  Zwingli's  onto- 
logical  speculations  did  not  appeal  to  him  in  the  least. 
He  blamed  the  older  man  for  them,  and  claimed  that  he 
himself  followed  Scripture  only,  and  allowed  human 
reason  no  place  in  the  formation  of  his  views.  He  was 
mistaken  in  this.  His  ideas  touching  God's  character 
and  activities  were  in  no  small  part  the  result  of  logical 
deduction  from  a  preconceived  theory  of  deity.  Scripture, 
though  continually  appealed  to  and  ostensibly  made  the 
sole  source,  really  did  no  more  than  supply  some  of  the 
data  upon  which  a  logical  theory  was  constructed.  These 
data  harmonised  with  his  own  temperament  and  experi- 
ence, and  so  were  made  use  of  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others. 

Calvin's  appeal  to  the  Bible  rather  than  to  philosophy 
in  support  of  his  teaching  did  much  to  establish  the 
doctrine  of  absolute  predestination  in  the  reformed  church. 
The  philosophical  considerations  of  Zwingli  carried  little 
weight  except  among  philosophers.  The  Biblical  argu- 
ment, which  both  Zwingli  and  Bucer  had  employed, 
but  which  Calvin  presented  with  new  emphasis  and  in 
greater  fulness,  was  much  more  convincing. 

Calvin's  claim  that  the  Scriptures  alone  were  to  be 
followed,  and  that  no  one  was  to  go  beyond  what  was 
written,  made  it  possible  for  him  frequently  to  avoid 
drawing  the  obvious  conclusions  of  his  own  theory.  He 
contrasts  his  moderation  in  this  respect  with  Zwingli's 
greater  consistency,  and  criticises  the  latter  for  his  ex- 
treme statements.^  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Calvin's  theory 
led  exactly  where  Zwingli's  did,  and  his  customary  reti- 
cence was  less  creditable  than  the  outspokenness  of  the 
older  reformer.^    But  it  undoubtedly  served  to  obscure 

1  See  his  letter  to  Bullinger,  Opera,  vol.  xiv.  p.  253  ;  on  the  other  side  his 
r?8j))n.se  in  the  Process  of  Bolsec,  viii.  182. 

-  Tn  his  Insti'ufes,  edition  of  1559,  bk.  I.  chap,  xviii.,  Calyin  declares  in 
full  agreement  with  Zwingli  that  God  is  Himself  the  cause  of  men's  evil  deeds. 


v.]  JOHN  CALVIN  89 

some  of  the  most  obnoxious  features  of  the  doctrine,  and 
thus  made  it  more  acceptable  to  the  church. 

Correlative  with  his  conception  of  God  was  Calvin's 
idea  of  man  and  his  duty.  No  one  can  understand  and 
estimate  himself  aright  unless  he  knows  God.  '  For 
such  is  the  inborn  pride  of  us  all  that  we  invariably  esteem 
ourselves  righteous,  innocent,  wise,  and  holy,  until  we  are 
convinced  by  clear  proofs  of  our  unrighteousness,  turpi- 
tude, folly,  and  impurity.  But  we  are  never  thus  con- 
vinced while  we  confine  our  attention  to  ourselves  and 
regard  not  the  Lord  who  is  the  only  standard  by  which 
judgment  ought  to  be  formed.'  ^  '  Man  is  utterly  corrupt 
and  depraved,  and  humility  alone  becomes  him  in  the 
presence  of  God,  who  is  all  that  he  is  not.  To  know  God 
is  to  be  struck  with  horror  and  amazement,  for  then  and 
only  then  does  one  realise  his  own  character.'  ^  Man 
exists  for  the  sake  of  God's  glory,  and  his  supreme  duty 
is  to  promote  it.  There  is  no  true  virtue  where  concern 
for  God's  glory  is  not  present,  and  the  worst  of  all  sins  is 
giving  to  oneself  the  glory  due  to  God.^  Man  can  best 
promote  the  divine  glory  by  reverencing,  fearing,  and 
worshipping  God,  and  by  rendering  perfect  obedience  to 
His  will.  Pure  and  genuine  religion  consists  '  in  faith 
united  with  a  serious  fear  of  God — such  a  fear  as  compre- 
hends willing  reverence  and  results  in  legitimate  worship 
agreeable  to  the  injunctions  of  the  law.'  *  It  is  all-im- 
portant, therefore,  that  man  shall  know  God  and  His  will. 
This  knowledge  is  written  upon  the  pages  of  nature  and  the 
tables  of  the  heart,  but  man  has  been  blinded  by  sin,  and 
so  a  clearer  revelation  is  given  in  the  Bible,  which  is  God's 
highest  and  final  communication  of  His  will.  Like 
Zwingii,  Calvin  recognised  God's  general  revelation  of 
Himself,  and  he  even  declared  that  the  knowledge  of  God 
in   Himself   precedes    the   knowledge  of   Christ,   but   he 

1  Institutes,  edition  of  1559,  bk.  i.  chap.  i.  §  2.  2  lUd.  §  3. 

»  Ibid.  bk.  n.  chap.  iii.  §  4.  *  Ibid,  bk,  I.  chap,  ii,  §  2. 


90  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [en. 

denied  its  efficacy  and  sufficiency.  The  only  adequate 
and  trustworthy  declaration  of  God's  will  is  found  in  the 
Scriptures.  The  Bible  is  conceived,  as  by  Zwingli,  not 
primarily  as  a  means  of  grace,  but  as  a  revelation  of  the 
divine  will.  From  beginning  to  end  it  is  the  word  of  God, 
and  is  equally  authoritative  in  all  its  parts. 

Man  needs,  not  only  a  revelation  of  God's  will,  but  also 
power  to  obey  it,  and  forgiveness  for  disobedience.  This 
he  gets  through  Christ,  whose  work  is  pictured  in  the 
same  traditional  way  as  by  the  other  reformers.  Faith 
in  Christ  justifies  man  and  frees  him  from  the  divine 
condemnation  ;  salvation  is  by  faith  alone.  But  this  is 
not  enough,  for  he  is  utterly  corrupt,  and  can  do  nothing 
good  unless  regenerated  by  the  power  of  the  Spirit.  He 
is  predestinated,  not  simply  to  salvation,  but  to  holiness. 
He  is  called  to  do  God's  will,  and  for  this  end  he  was 
created.  The  Christian  life  consists  simply  in  keeping 
God's  commands,  and  that  not  because  they  are  good,  but 
because  they  are  commanded.  It  is  not  the  free  and 
spontaneous  expression  of  the  character  of  the  child  of  God, 
but  faithful  obedience  to  the  divine  will  laid  down  in  the 
Scriptures.  As  is  said  in  Book  iv.  chap.  x.  §  7  :  '  Every- 
thing pertaining  to  the  perfect  rule  of  a  good  life  the  Lord 
has  so  comprehended  in  His  law  that  there  remains  nothing 
for  man  to  add  to  that  summary.  And  He  has  done  this, 
first,  that  since  all  rectitude  of  life  consists  in  the  con- 
formity of  all  our  actions  to  His  will  as  their  standard,  we 
might  consider  Him  as  the  sole  master  and  director  of  our 
life  ;  and  secondly,  to  show  that  He  requires  of  us  nothing 
more  than  obedience.'  ^  Calvin  has  a  section  on  Christian 
Liberty  in  all  the  editions  of  his  histitutes,  but  it  is  a  very 
different  kind  of  liberty  from  that  which  Luther  taught. 
Not  liberty,  but  bondage  was  dear  to  Calvin.     He  dis- 

1  This  is  a  genuinely  Catholic  position.  With  it  mi^ht  be  compared  the 
definition  of  the  essence  of  Christianity  in  the  new  Catholic  K: cyclopaedia'. 
•Ob-dience  of  the  mind  and  will  to  the  Supreme  Power,  i.e.  faith  and 
works '  (vol.  vi.  p.  529). 


v.]  JOHN  CALVIN  91 

trusted,  not  only  the  natural  man,  but  the  Christian  man 
as  well,  and  believed  that  he  must  be  held  strictly  to  the 
observance  of  the  divine  law,  or  he  would  go  astray  and 
fall  into  sin.  By  Christian  liberty  he  meant  freedom  from 
dependence  upon  the  works  of  the  law  for  justification — 
how  could  any  man  justify  himself  in  the  sight  of  God  ? — 
and  also  freedom  from  the  obligation  to  obey  the  com- 
mandments of  men,  particularly  the  oppressive  regulations 
of  the  ecclesiastical  authorities. 

Calvin's  ideal  of  the  Christian  life  was  rigorous  in  the 
extreme.  Other-worldliness  was  its  principal  character- 
istic, abstinence  from  the  pleasures  and  frivolities  and 
luxuries  of  this  world,  as  well  as  from  its  sins.  As  he  says 
in  his  Institutes  (Book  iii.  chap,  ix.)  :  *  With  whatever 
kind  of  tribulation  we  may  be  afflicted,  we  should  always 
keep  this  end  in  view,  to  habituate  ourselves  to  a  contempt 
of  the  present  life  that  we  may  thereby  be  excited  to  medi- 
tation on  that  which  is  to  come  '  (§  1).  '  There  is  no 
medium  between  these  two  extremes,  either  the  earth 
must  become  vile  in  our  estimation,  or  it  must  retain  our 
immoderate  love.  Wherefore  if  we  have  any  concern 
about  eternity,  we  must  use  our  most  diligent  efforts  to 
extricate  ourselves  from  these  fetters  '  (§  2).  'It  should 
be  the  object  of  believers,  therefore,  in  judging  of  this 
mortal  life  that,  understanding  it  to  be  of  itself  nothing 
but  misery,  they  may  apply  themselves  wholly  with  in- 
creasing cheerfulness  and  readiness  to  meditate  on  the 
future  and  eternal  life.  \Mien  we  come  to  this  comparison, 
then  indeed  the  former  will  be  not  only  securely  neglected, 
but  in  competition  with  the  latter  altogether  despised  and 
abhorred.  For  if  heaven  is  our  country,  what  is  the  earth 
but  a  place  of  exile  ?  If  the  departure  out  of  the  world 
is  an  entrance  into  life,  what  is  the  world  but  a  sepulchre  ? 
Wliat  is  a  continuance  in  it  but  an  absorption  in  death  ? 
If  deliverance  from  the  body  is  an  introduction  into 
genuine    liberty,   what   is  the   body  but  a  prison  ?      If 


92  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

to  enjoy  the  presence  of  God  is  the  summit  of  felicity,  is 
it  not  misery  to  be  destitute  of  it  ?  But '  until  we  escape 
out  of  the  world  we  are  absent  from  the  Lord.  Therefore, 
if  the  terrestrial  life  be  compared  with  the  celestial,  it  should 
undoubtedly  be  despised  and  accounted  of  no  value  '  (§4). 
'  Therefore,  though  the  liberty  of  believers  in  external 
things  cannot  be  reduced  to  a  certain  rule,  yet  it  is  evi- 
dently subject  to  this  law  that  they  should  indulge  them- 
selves as  little  as  possible  ;  that  on  the  contrary  they 
should  perpetually  and  resolutely  exert  themselves  to 
retrench  all  superfluities  and  to  restrain  luxury  ;  and 
that  they  should  diligently  beware  lest  they  pervert  into 
impediments  things  which  were  given  for  their  assistance ' 
(chap.  X.  §  4).  In  his  effort  to  stamp  this  ideal  upon  the 
city  of  Geneva,  Calvin  was  simply  following  the  example 
set  by  Bucer,  whose  principles  were  of  the  same  sort,  but 
he  carried  matters  much  further  and  succeeded  much 
better  than  the  Strassburg  reformer. 

In  his  conception  of  God  and  of  man's  relation  to  Him, 
Calvin  agreed  with  Zwingli,  but  he  was  ethically  more 
rigorous,  and  conceived  the  Christian  life  in  a  much  more 
Puritanic  fashion.  Zwingli  was  engaged  chiefly  in  breaking 
the  control  of  Rome,  and  in  securing  a  foothold  for  the  new 
faith.  Calvin  devoted  himself  very  largely  to  strengthen- 
ing, consolidating,  and  purifying  a  Protestantism  already 
established  before  he  began  his  work.  We  call  Calvin  one 
of  the  Reformers,  but  he  belonged  to  the  second  generation, 
and  his  task  was  to  conserve  rather  than  to  create.  This 
is  illustrated  both  in  his  theology  and  in  his  practical  work. 

It  was  a  mark  of  Calvin's  greater  conservatism  that  he 
made  more  than  Zwingli  did  of  the  means  of  grace.  He 
saw,  as  Luther  did,  in  Zwingli's  liberal  attitude  toward 
the  non-Christian  world  a  dangerous  error.  No  one  has 
ever  been  saved  or  can  possibly  be  saved  except  through 
Christ.  It  is  true  that  God  elects  whom  He  pleases,  and 
that  His  election  is  the  ultimate  ground  of  salvation,  but 


v.]  JOHN  CALVIN  93 

He  saves  no  one  apart  from  Christ.  Although  Calvin 
recognised  the  possibility  that  the  Spirit  of  God  might 
act  independently  of  the  ordinary  means  of  grace  in  certain 
special  cases,  as,  for  instance,  in  the  case  of  infants  and 
idiots,  he  yet  made  much  more  of  those  means  than  Zwingli, 
and  attached  salvation,  as  Luther  did,  to  the  word  and  the 
sacraments.  His  view  of  the  Lord's  Supper  he  took  from 
Bucer,  teaching  the  spiritual  presence  of  Christ  in  the 
elements  and  the  nourishment  of  the  regenerated  life  by 
Him.  The  idea  is  more  Catholic  than  the  controlling  idea 
of  Luther,  even  though  it  substitutes  a  spiritual  for  a 
material  presence,  for  Luther  laid  emphasis  on  the  testi- 
mony borne  by  the  sacrament,  while  with  Calvin  the 
important  thing  was  feeding  upon  Christ.  Calvin's 
adoption  of  the  doctrine  gave  it  a  permanent  and  indisput- 
able place  in  reformed  theology.  In  1549,  by  the  Con- 
sensus Tigurinensis,  even  Zurich  accepted  it,  and  thence- 
forth it  was  the  only  recognised  doctrine  in  the  reformed 
wing  of  Protestantism. 

The  sacrament  of  baptism  Calvin  brought  into  connec- 
tion with  regeneration,  as  Bucer,  and  before  him,  even 
Luther  himself  had  done,  and  thus  both  sacraments  found 
their  significance  rather  in  the  fact  that  they  imparted 
grace  to  the  recipient  than  that  they  were  signs  or  testi- 
monies to  the  gospel.  In  other  words,  the  Catholic 
prevailed  over  the  genuinely  Protestant  conception  of 
their  meaning  and  value. 

In  his  doctrine  of  the  Church  Calvin  was  also  more 
conservative  than  Zwingli,  and  stood  nearer  to  Luther 
than  he.  He  defined  the  Church  in  agreement  with  Zwingli 
and  Bucer  as  the  totality  of  the  elect,  and  he  made  pre- 
destination its  constitutive  factor.  But  the  Church  is 
visible  as  well  as  invisible,  and  its  marks  are  the  word  and 
the  sacraments.  Where  the  word  is  truly  taught  and  the 
sacraments  rightly  administered  there  is  the  Church,  and 
outside  of  its  pale  there  is  ordinarily  no  salvation.     Calvin 


94  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

was  very  insistent  upon  this  point.  '  What  God  has  joined 
together,'  he  says,  '  it  is  wrong  to  put  asunder  ;  for  to 
those  to  whom  God  is  a  Father  the  Church  also  is  a 
mother.'  ^  And  again  :  '  As  our  present  design  is  to  treat 
of  the  visible  Church,  we  may  learn  even  from  the  title 
of  mother  how  useful  and  even  necessary  it  is  for  us 
to  know  her,  since  there  is  no  other  way  of  entrance 
into  life  unless  we  are  conceived  by  her,  born  of  her, 
nourished  at  her  breast,  and  continually  preserved  under 
her  care  and  government  till  we  are  divested  of  this 
mortal  flesh  and  become  like  the  angels.  For  our  infirmity 
will  not  admit  of  our  dismission  from  school  until  we  have 
been  disciples  to  the  end  of  our  lives.  It  is  also  to  be  re- 
marked that  out  of  her  bosom  there  can  be  no  hope  of 
remission  of  sins  nor  any  salvation.'  ^ 

This  was  not  in  consequence  of  any  necessity  due  to  the 
nature  of  the  case — because  one  could  not  believe  without 
hearing  the  gospel  of  God's  forgiving  love  in  Christ,  and 
could  not  hear  it  apart  from  the  Church,  as  Luther  said, 
but  because  it  was  God's  will  that  it  should  be  so.  He 
could  have  fixed  other  conditions,  but  He  has  actually 
fixed  these,  and  that  is  all  we  need  to  know.  God  might, 
Calvin  said,  have  made  his  people  perfect  in  a  moment, 
but  it  was  not  His  will  that  they  should  grow  to  mature 
age  save  under  the  education  of  the  Church.^  The  test  of 
every  system,  institution,  and  means  of  grace  is  not  its 
fitness  to  the  work  in  hand,  but  its  conformity  to  the  will 
of  God.  What  He  has  ordained  is  necessary  and  right 
because  He  has  ordained  it.  This  principle  gave  to  the  life, 
the  polity,  and  the  worship  of  the  Calvinistic  churches  a  very 
different  cast  from  the  Lutheran.  God's  will  as  expressed 
in  the  Bible  must  be  followed  in  everything,  and  for  every 
part  of  the  ecclesiastical  system  directions  must  be  found 
there.  Of  the  freedom  of  the  Spirit  there  remained  very 
little.  The  control  of  the  letter  was  minute  and  far  reaching. 
1  Institutes,  bk.  iv.  chap.  i.  §  1.  2  jbid,  §  4.  »  Jbid,  §  6. 


v.]  JOHN  CALVIN  95 

By  the  word  of  God,  which  is  one  of  the  marks  of  the 
Church,  Calvin  understood,  not  the  gospel  of  God's  forgiving 
love,  but  the  Bible  as  a  whole,  or  rather  the  Bible  properly 
interpreted — in  other  words,  sound  doctrine.  WTiere  such 
doctrine  is  faithfully  taught,  there  is  the  true  Church ; 
where  error  is  substituted  for  it,  the  Church  is  destroyed.^ 
It  was  upon  the  basis  of  this  principle  that  Calvin  justi- 
fied Protestant  secession  from  the  Church  of  Rome. 

Attention  has  already  been  called  to  Calvin's  rigorous 
interpretation  of  the  duties  of  the  Christian  life,  and  to 
his  distrust  even  of  the  Christian  man.  This  led  him  to  lay 
great  stress  on  ecclesiastical  discipline.  The  Christian 
Church  is  a  people  predestinated  to  holiness.  Their 
supreme  duty  is  not  to  serve  their  fellows  and  to  establish 
the  reign  of  the  spirit  of  love  in  all  the  institutions  and 
relationships  of  this  earth,  but  to  walk  humbly  with  God, 
to  obey  Him  in  all  things,  and  to  keep  themselves  un- 
spotted from  the  world.  The  Church  is  a  body  apart,  a 
community  of  holy  people,  pure  both  in  doctrine  and  in 
conduct,  because  governed  wholly  by  the  word  of  God. 
Ecclesiastical  discipline,  therefore,  must  be  very  strict. 
'  As  the  saving  doctrine  of  Christ  is  the  soul  of  the  Church, 
so  discipline  forms  the  ligaments  by  which  the  members 
of  the  body  are  joined  together  and  kept  each  in  its  proper 
place.'  2  In  the  exercise  of  its  disciplinary  authority,  the 
Church  must  admonish  or  visit  with  its  censures  all  sorts 
«of  offenders,  and  must  altogether  exclude  from  its  com- 
munion those  guilty  of  gross  and  flagrant  sins. 

Moreover,  the  exercise  of  its  disciplinary  functions 
Calvin  lodged  in  the  officers  of  the  Church.  They  are 
charged  with  the  responsibility  of  keeping  the  Church 
pure,  and  the  members  must  submit  to  their  authority. 
Here  is  revealed,  what  appears  in  many  other  connections, 
Calvin's  deep-rooted  aversion  to  democracy.  He  did  not 
trust  the  ordinary  man,  even  though  a  Christian.  He 
i  Cf.  InstUuf'Ji^  His..  IV.  chap.  i.  §  12.  *  IMd.  chap.  xii.  §  1. 


96  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

was  instinctively  an  aristocrat  in  religious  as  well  as 
in  civil  matters,  and  he  believed  that  the  Church  could  be 
properly  governed,  and  its  character  preserved,  only  when 
a  large  measure  of  control  was  lodged  in  the  hands  of  its 
ministers.  Their  authority  did  not  rest  upon  the  fact  that 
they  were  successors  of  the  Apostles,  and  had  received 
from  them  a  deposit  of  saving  grace  which  they  might 
dispense  or  withhold,  in  other  words  it  was  not  sacerdotal, 
but  upon  the  fact  that  they  were  ministers  of  the  word. 
Because  called  and  commissioned  by  God  to  preach  the 
word,  they  were  also  intrusted  with  the  responsibility 
of  exercising  discipline  in  accordance  therewith.  Calvin's 
influence  in  promoting  civil  liberty  and  democracy  is  often 
spoken  of  and  counted  to  his  credit.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
it  was  far  from  his  intention  to  promote  either,  for  he  was 
opposed  to  both.  He  did  much  to  break  the  power  of  the 
Pope  in  Western  Europe,  and  so  to  prepare  the  way  for 
the  growth  of  a  larger  liberty  in  later  days,  but  he  was  at 
best  only  indirectly  responsible  for  a  development  which 
he  would  have  been  entirely  out  of  sympathy  with  had  he 
lived  to  witness  it. 

One  more  matter  in  which  Calvin  differed  both  with 
'^wingli  and  with  Luther  was  the  relation  of  Church  and 
State.  He  agreed  with  them  in  laying  upon  the  civil 
government  the  responsibility  to  cherish  and  support  the 
external  worship  of  God,  to  preserve  the  pure  doctrine 
of  religion,  to  defend  the  constitution  of  the  Church,  and 
to  suppress  idolatry,  sacrilege,  blasphemy,  and  other 
offences  against  God.^  But  while  the  older  reformers 
gave  civil  governors  the  power  of  determining  what 
is  true  religion  according  to  the  word  of  God,  and  ex- 
pected them  to  support  the  true  and  prohibit  the  false 
thus  determined,  Calvin,  though  distinguishing  the  func- 
tions of  Church  and  State,  and  recognising  the  differ- 
ence between  their  spheres,  yet  followed  the  Catholics 

I  Institutes,  bk.  IV.  chap.  xx.  |  23. 


v.]  JOHN  CALVIN  97 

of  the  Middle  Ages  in  regarding  the  civil  government 
as  only  the  handmaid  of  the  Church  in  carrying  out  its 
behests.  It  lies  with  the  Church,  and  particularly  with 
the  clerg3^  as  ministers  of  the  word,  to  determine  God's 
will  and  truth,  and  upon  the  civil  government  is  laid  the 
obligation  of  acting  accordingly.  The  power  of  the  sword 
is  lodged  only  in  the  State,  but  it  is  to  be  exercised  for  the 
support  of  the  true  Church,  and  for  the  overthrow  of  its 
enemies,  who  are  the  enemies  of  God. 

In  Geneva  Calvin's  principles  were  put  into  striking 
practice,  and  the  influence  of  his  work  there.  Catholic  as 
were  the  underlying  principles  on  which  it  was  based, 
constituted  Western  Europe's  greatest  bulwark  against 
the  encroachments  of  a  newly  awakened  papacy  and  a 
regenerated  Catholicism.  His  historical  significance  is 
far  greater  in  the  sphere  of  government  than  in  that  of 
theology.  It  was  as  an  ecclesiastical  statesman  that  he 
did  his  greatest  work.  In  his  theology  there  was  nothing 
new,  but  in  his  career  as  an  organiser  and  dictator  of  the 
forces  of  western  Protestantism,  there  was  displayed  a 
genius  for  leadership  and  a  power  of  initiative  and  of 
control  unsurpassed  in  the  period  of  the  Reformation. 

It  is  evident  in  the  light  of  all  that  has  been  said  that 
between  Calvin  and  Zwingli,  the  two  great  fathers  of  the 
Reform^ed  Church,  there  were  both  resemblances  and 
differences  of  considerable  importance.  It  is  often  claimed 
that  Calvin  was  more  at  one  with  Luther  than  with  Zwingli, 
and  undoubtedly  he  did  in  most  respects  stand  nearer 
Wittenberg  than  Zwingli  did.  But  it  must  not  be  for- 
gotten that  he  remained  in  the  Reformed  wing  of  the  Church 
of  which  Zwingli  was  the  earliest  leader.  That  he  did  so 
was  not  due  to  the  mere  accident  of  geography,  but  to  the 
fact  that  he  was  really,  in  spite  of  his  greater  respect  for 
Luther,  far  more  profoundly  one  with  Zwingli  and  the 
Reformed  type  of  piety.  This  was  of  greater  import- 
ance than  all  oneness  in  theology.     Zwingli,  Bucer,  Calvin, 

G 


98  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOKE  KANT  [ch. 

and  the  Reformed  churclies  in  general  represent  a  type 
of  piety  strikingly  different,  at  least  in  its  controlling 
tendency,  from  that  of  Luther  and  his  followers.  To  the 
Wittenberg  reformer  the  experience  of  God's  forgiving  love 
in  Christ  was  fundamental.  To  the  Reformed  theologians, 
though  they  recognised  this,  and  even  emphasised  it,  the 
^^^  dominating  element  in  experience  was  the  consciousness 
of  the  power  and  ordaining  will  of  God.  Zwingli  was 
nearer  Luther  than  Calvin  was  in  his  greater  emphasis 
on  the  goodness  of  God,  but  to  both  of  them,  and  particu- 
larly to  Calvin,  God  as  Sovereign  loomed  larger  than 
God  as  Saviour.  God  in  Christ  was  the  God  of  Luther's 
experience,  God  the  Creator  and  Ruler  of  the  world  the 
God  of  Zwingli  and  of  Calvin.  This  difference  made  it- 
self seen  in  all  their  religious  feeling,  thinking,  worship, 
and  service,  and  the  difference  has  been  marked  ever  since 
in  the  two  divisions  of  Protestantism.  If  justification  by 
faith  is  the  fundamental  doctrine  in  Lutheranism,  the  con- 
trolling will  of  God  is  fundamental  in  the  Protestantism 
of  the  Reformed  churches. 

Our  study  of  the  different  reformers  has  made  it  clear 
enough  that  they  all  lived  in  the  mediaeval  world.  Of 
modern  views  in  philosophy,  science,  history,  or  politics, 
there  is  scarcely  a  trace  in  any  of  them.  They  all  believed 
in  the  depravity  and  helplessness  of  man,  and  in  his  need 
of  a  miraculous  redemption.  They  all  looked  upon 
Christianity  as  a  supernatural  system  in  the  fullest  sense. 
They  were  all  more  or  less  consistent  authoritarians,  Calvin 
the  most  so  of  all,  and  while  Luther  had  a  magnificent 
conception  of  Christian  liberty,  which  was  thoroughly 
in  harmony  with  the  best  spirit  of  the  modern  age,  he  held 
as  firmly  as  the  others  to  the  bondage  of  the  natural  man, 
with  the  result  that  his  higher  view  was  obscured  and 
generally  lost  sight  of. 

In  certain  waj^s,  nevertheless,  the  Reformation  did  pro- 
mote the  spirit  of  liberty  in  the  modern  world.    It  broke  the 


v]  JOHN  CALVIN  99 

hold  of  the  Roman  Church,  the  greatest  foe  of  hberty,  and 
by  its  own  inner  dissensions  and  divisions  prevented  any 
new  church  from  gaining  the  control  which  the  old  institu- 
tion had  exercised.  In  the  conflict  of  the  sects  freedom 
had  room  to  grow.  Moreover,  the  assertion  of  the  right 
of  private  judgment  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures, 
though  so  limited  by  the  reformers  themselves  and  by  their 
followers,  that  it  promoted  the  existence  of  sects,  but  long 
meant  nothing  at  all  for  individual  liberty,  did  ultimately 
make  possible  the  gradual  growth  of  a  real  freedom  within 
Protestantism.  Other  influences  than  the  Reformation 
had  to  do  with  the  rise  and  spread  of  liberty  in  the 
modern  world,  but  the  divisions  among  Protestants  and 
their  theory  of  private  judgment  gave  it  a  chance  to  pene- 
trate the  Protestant  churches  much  more  easily  and 
rapidly  than  the  Catholic  church.  Protestantism  through- 
out most  of  its  history  has  been  fully  as  narrow  and  as 
conservative  as  Roman  Catholicism,  but  it  is  not  an 
accident  that  liberalism  has  had  a  larger  and  longer 
development  within  it  than  within  the  older  communion. 


100  PHOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [en. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE   RADICAL  SECTS 
I.  The  Anabaptists 

The  sixteenth  century  was  marked  by  the  rise  of  many 
radical  sects.  Some  of  them  were  the  fruit  of  the 
Protestant  Reformation,  and  were  due  to  the  more  con- 
sistent appHcation  of  principles,  explicit  or  implicit,  in  the 
teaching  of  the  great  reformers;  others  were  of  inde- 
pendent origin.  Their  radicalism  was  of  various  kinds 
and  degrees;  sometimes  religious  only,  often  social  and 
political  as  well.  Generally  the}^  were  quiet  and  harmless 
folk,  but  not  infrequently  revolutionists  and  even  anar- 
chists. They  were  regarded  with  peculiar  bitterness  by 
the  Protestant  leaders,  because  their  radicalism  brought 
disrepute  upon  the  whole  Protestant  movement,  which  was 
commonly  held  accountable  for  them,  and  the  result  was 
that  they  received  as  severe,  or  even  severer  treatment 
from  their  hands  than  from  the  hands  of  the  Catholics. 

There  was  little  discrimination  in  their  opponents' 
judgment  of  them.  They  were  all  charged  with  the 
excesses  of  the  few  and  were  visited  with  like  condemna- 
tion whatever  their  personal  character  and  individual 
aims.  As  the  Catholics  held  the  Protestants  responsible 
for  all  the  radicalism  and  fanaticism  of  the  age,  the 
Protestant  leaders  held  all  who  were  more  radical  than 
themselves  responsible  for  the  worst  excesses  of  the 
revolutionists.  Because  many  of  the  sects  were  one  in 
insisting  upon  the  baptism  of  believers  only,  and  in  re- 


tl]  the  radical  sects  101 

pudiating  infant  baptism,  they  were  known  by  their 
opponents  as  Anabaptists,  or  rebaptisers,  and  the  name 
came  to  be  a  common  appellation  for  religious  radicals 
of  the  day,  whatever  their  attitude  on  this  particular 
point.  It  was  everywhere  used  as  a  term  of  reproach,  and 
to  call  a  man  an  Anabaptist  was  to  condemn  him  to 
general  obloquy.  In  view  of  the  loose  and  indiscriminate 
use  of  the  term  it  is  quite  impossible,  and  indeed  unim- 
portant in  a  book  of  this  kind,  to  take  account  of  all  those 
known  as  Anabaptists.  Some  of  the  positions,  however, 
which  were  common  to  many  of  them,  had  considerable 
influence  upon  the  development  of  Protestant  thought  and 
life,  and  they  demand  at  least  brief  attention. 

At  two  points  the  Anabaptists  differed  w^idely  with 
the  great  Protestant  reformers — in  their  theory  of  the 
Christian  Church,  and  in  their  view  of  the  Christian  life. 
They  took  their  stand  upon  the  authority  of  the  Bible, 
particularly  the  New  Testament,  which  they  believed 
Protestants  in  general  were  not  following  as  they  ought, 
and  in  accordance  with  what  they  understood  to  be  its 
teachings  they  regarded  the  Church  as  a  community  of 
saints  composed  of  true  believers  alone — and  by  this  they 
meant,  not  the  invisible  Church,  of  which  the  reformers 
were  talking,  but  the  visible  Christian  community.  Follow- 
ing the  primitive  Christians,  who  knew  no  such  artificial 
distinction  as  that  between  the  visible  and  invisible  Church, 
they  undertook  to  make  the  Christian  community  actually 
a  community  of  saints.  It  is,  they  maintained,  the  visible 
embodiment  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  contains  only 
those  who  are  truly  citizens  of  that  kingdom.  Holding 
this  theory  of  the  Church,  they  withdrew  from  the  ecclesi- 
astical bodies  to  which  they  had  belonged,  believing  it 
impossible  to  transform  them  into  genuine  churches  of 
Christ,  and  formed  conventicles  or  churches  of  their  own, 
to  which  only  those  were  admitted  who  gave  evidence  in 
character  and  conduct  of  having  been  truly  regenerated, 


102  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

and  of  being  in  possession  of  saving  faith.  These  churches 
they  regarded  as  alone  genuine  churches  of  Christ,  and  they 
commonly  refused  altogether  to  commime  with  those  who 
were  not  members  of  them. 

Of  a  general  ecclesiastical  body  controlling  the  individual 
communities  they  would  hear  nothing.  Not  only  of 
individualism  in  religion,  but  also  of  the  independence  of 
each  group  of  true  Christians  and  their  freedom  from  out- 
side domination,  they  made  much.  The  greatest  emphasis 
was  laid  upon  the  moral  character  of  the  regenerated,  and 
the  strictest  discipline  was  exercised,  the  effort  being  to 
exclude  from  the  Church  all  whose  lives  did  not  bear 
constant  witness  to  the  new  birth  and  the  sanctifying 
influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  following  quotation 
from  the  Twelve  Articles  of  Christian  Belief,  by  Balthasar 
Hiibmaier,  one  of  the  earliest  and  most  influential  of  their 
leaders,  indicates  clearly  enough  the  conception  of  the 
Church  shared  by  most  of  them.  '  I  believe  also  and  con- 
fess a  holy  Catholic  Christian  Church,  which  is  the  com- 
munion of  saints,  and  a  brotherhood  of  many  pious  and 
believing  men,  who  unitedly  confess  one  Lord,  one  God, 
one  faith,  and  one  baptism  ;  assembled,  maintained,  and 
ruled  on  earth  by  the  only  living  and  divine  Word,  alto- 
gether beautiful  and  without  any  spot,  unerring,  pure, 
without  wrinkle,  and  blameless.'  '  I  believe  and  confess 
also  the  remission  of  sins,  so  that  this  Christian  Church 
has  received  keys,  command  and  power  from  Thee,  O 
Christ,  to  open  the  gates  of  Heaven  for  the  sinner  as  often 
as  he  repenteth  and  is  sorry  for  his  sin,  and  receive  him 
again  into  the  holy  assembly  of  believers  in  Christ,  like 
the  lost  son  and  the  repentant  Corinthian.  But  when  he, 
after  the  three-fold  brotherly  reproof,  will  not  abstain 
from  sin,  I  firmly  believe  that  this  Church  also  has  power 
to  exclude  him  and  to  hold  him  as  a  publican  and  heathen. 
Here  I  believe  and  confess  openly,  my  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
that   whomsoever   the  Christian   Church    on   earth   thus 


VI.]  THE  RADICAL  SECTS  103 

looseth,  he  is  certainly  loosed  and  released  in  heaven. 
Again,  whomsoever  the  Church  bindeth  and  casteth  out 
of  her  assembly  on  earth,  he  is  bound  before  God  in  heaven 
and  excluded  from  the  Catholic  Christian  Cliurch  (out  of 
which  there  is  no  saJvation).'  ^ 

Emphasis  was  laid  also  upon  the  contrast  between  the 
Church  and  the  world,  and  the  effort  was  to  withdraw  as 
far  as  possible  from  contact  with  all  outsiders,  who  were 
condemned  as  worldly  whether  they  were  within  the  exist- 
ing ecclesiastical  establishment  or  not.  The  separateness 
and  aloofness  of  the  Christian  Church  from  all  the  rest 
of  the  world  was  in  fact  a  fundamental  tenet ;  '  Come  ye 
out  from  among  them  and  be  ye  separate  '  a  favourite 
text.  Unworldliness  and  other-worldliness  were  constant 
watchwords,  and  tendencies  toward  a  more  or  less  extreme 
asceticism  were  very  common. 

The  true  Church,  according  to  the  Anabaptists,  was 
composed  only  of  the  regenerated,  and  moreover  not 
necessarily  of  all  the  regenerated,  who  were  known  only 
to  God.  It  was  a  visible,  not  an  invisible  Church,  and  in 
it  were  only  those  who  accepted  Christian  baptism,  and  so 
publicly  declared  themselves  followers  of  Christ,  and  testi- 
fied to  their  own  experience  of  regeneration.  In  other 
words,  entrance  into  the  Church  was  by  the  voluntary 
act  of  those  already  regenerated.  To  be  regenerated  was 
not  the  same  as  to  enter  the  Christian  Church.  The  latter 
was  a  step  by  itself  but  a  necessary  step.  If  one  refused 
to  accept  baptism  and  to  enter  into  public  covenant  with 
God,  one  could  not  be  saved,  for  to  do  so  was  to  disobey 
the  express  command  of  God;  but  there  was  no  saving 
virtue  in  baptism  as  such.  In  fact  the  sacramental  view 
of  both  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  was  commonly 
rejected  by  them,  though  they  continued  to  practise  both, 
the  one  as  a  sign  of  regeneration  and  pledge  of  Christian 

1  Quoted  from  Vedder,  Balthasar  Hviviaier  {Heroes  of  the  Reformation 
Series),  p.  134  sq. 


104  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [en. 

living,  the  other  as  a  common  meal  memorialising  the  death 
of  Christ,  and  symbolising  communion  with  Him  and  with 
each  other. 

Their  notion  of  the  voluntary  character  of  the  Christian 
Church,  as  a  body  constituted  by  the  free  act  of  Christian 
men,  is  of  the  very  essence  of  the  Anabaptist  theory  of 
the  Church.  As  a  result  of  this  action  infants  were  not 
regarded  as  members  of  the  Church,  and  hence  infant 
baptism  was  rejected,  not  only  as  unnecessary,  but  as 
sacrilegious.  Baptism  was  looked  upon,  not  as  a  means 
of  regeneration  in  the  traditional  Catholic  way,  but  as  a 
sign  that  it  had  been  accomplished.  Only  those  already 
regenerated  were  to  be  baptized,  and  a  pre-condition  of 
regeneration  was  conscious  faith.  It  is  evident  that  there 
is  here  only  the  more  consistent  carrying  out  of  Luther's 
fundamental  principle  of  salvation  by  faith  alone,  a 
principle  which  he  was  himself  untrue  to,  when  he  retained 
infant  baptism  while  continuing  to  look  upon  it  as  a  sacra- 
ment. If  it  be  a  sacrament  then  it  is  inconsistent  with 
Protestant  principles  to  administer  it  to  those  who  have 
no  faith. 

A  farther  consequence  of  the  Anabaptists'  conception 
of  the  Church  as  composed  only  of  true  believers  and 
distinguished  sharply,  not  only  from  the  world,  but  also 
from  all  existing  ecclesiastical  establishments,  was  their 
common  insistence  upon  the  separation  of  Church  and 
State.  A  Church  composed  only  of  the  regenerate  could 
not  exist  under  the  control  of  the  civil  government,  bound 
by  laws  of  its  making,  and  subject  to  its  authority.  Nor 
was  it  proper  for  members  of  the  true  Church  to  give  them- 
selves to  the  service  of  the  world  in  positions  of  civil 
responsibility.  In  Seven  Articles,  agreed  upon  in  1527, 
by  the  Anabaptists  of  Switzerland  and  South-western 
Germany,^  it  is  declared  among  other  things  that  while 
civil  government  and  the  exercise  of  civil  authority  are  of 
1  See  Moeller's  Kirchengeschichie,  vol.  iii.  p.  402  sq. 


VI.]  THE  RADICAL  SECTS  105 

divine  appointment,  the  Church  has  nothing  to  do  there- 
with. In  it  only  spiritual  discipline  is  to  be  exercised,  and 
Christians  are  not  to  take  part  in  affairs  of  State,  or  hold 
official  positions  of  any  kind.  The  separation,  in  other 
words,  between  civil  and  spiritual  affairs  is  to  be  complete. 

The  severance  of  Church  and  State  upon  which  the 
Anabaptists  insisted,  carried  with  it  the  rejection  of  the 
age-long  notion  that  physical  compulsion  may  rightly 
be  exercised  in  matters  of  faith.  The  Church,  the  Ana- 
baptists claimed,  may  excommunicate  the  heretical  as 
well  as  the  unholy,  but  its  authority  is  spiritual  only,  and 
the  civil  power  has  no  rights  in  the  premises.  They  were 
thus  in  advance  of  all  the  great  reformers  in  insisting 
upon  freedom  of  conscience,  and  condemning  religious 
persecution  of  every  kind,  and  their  influence  along  this 
line  was  ultimately  very  great. 

Equally  important  with  the  Anabaptist  theory  of  the 
Church,  and  still  more  at  variance  with  common  Reforma- 
tion doctrine,  was  their  notion  of  salvation  and  the  Christian 
life.  Luther's  idea  of  salvation  by  the  grace  of  God  alone 
through  faith,  and  not  through  works,  foimd  little  accept- 
ance among  them.  On  the  contrary,  they  were  in  sympathy 
with  traditional  Catholicism  in  em.phasising  the  free  will 
of  man,  and  the  necessity  of  earning  future  blessedness 
as  a  reward.  Their  doctrine  was  legal  to  the  last  degree. 
Not,  to  be  sure,  by  ecclesiastical  rites  and  ceremonies, 
and  not  by  works  of  penance — all  these  they  repudiated, 
but  by  the  faithful  observance  of  the  law  of  God,  and 
particularly  by  brotherly  love  and  holiness,  the  Christian 
man  must  win  the  guerdon  of  eternal  life.  No  one  can 
earn  salvation  by  himself;  regeneration  by  divine  grace 
is  always  necessary.  But  the  regenerated  man  must 
make  the  proper  use  of  his  opportunities  or  he  will  infallibly 
perish .  Of  divine  predestination  they  would  hear  nothing, 
of  individual  responsibility  and  capacity  they  made  much. 
It  is  evident  that  men  who  held  such  positions  can  hardljf 


106  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOEE  KANT  [ch. 

have  learned  their  Cliristianity  from  Luther  or  ZwingH. 
As  a  matter  of  fact  their  ideas  were  for  the  most  part 
formed  independently  of  the  great  reformers.  They 
belonged,  as  is  now  generally  recognised,  to  circles  which 
had  already  largely  broken  with  the  Roman  Catholic 
establishment,  at  least  in  spirit,  before  Luther  came  upon 
the  scene.  When  he  began  his  reforming  work,  he  attracted 
multitudes  of  them,  for  he  seemed  to  promise  the  libera- 
tion from  the  old  system  for  which  they  had  long  been 
praying ;  and  his  theory  of  the  Church  as  a  community 
of  saints  doubtless  had  its  influence.  But  they  soon  dis- 
covered their  differences.  Some  of  Luther's  principles 
were  utterly  opposed  to  theirs  ;  and  some  of  the  principles 
which  they  held  in  common  he  applied  much  less  con- 
sistently, or  in  altogether  different  fashion.  As  a  result, 
they  broke  with  him  and  went  their  independent  way. 
They  broke  also  with  Zwingli  on  the  same  general  ground, 
and  they  were  denounced  by  both  reformers  alike,  and,  in 
reaction  against  them,  both  became  more  conservative 
than  would  otherwise  have  been  the  case. 

It  is  evident,  in  the  light  of  what  has  been  said,  that  it 
is  only  partially  correct  to  call  the  Anabaptists  the  radicals 
of  the  Reformation  period.  In  many  respects  they  were 
more  radical  than  the  great  reformers  and  their  followers, 
but  in  some  ways  they  were  more  conservative,  and  re- 
tained mediaeval  conceptions  which  the  reformers  re- 
jected. Both  in  their  radicalism  and  in  their  conservatism 
they  resembled  Calvin  more  than  Luther.  In  their 
emphasis  upon  the  absolute  authority  of  the  Bible  and  the 
necessity  of  regulating  all  things  by  its  teachings  ;  in  their 
insistence  upon  strict  discipline  in  order  to  keep  the  Church 
pure  ;  and  in  their  legalism,  their  other-worldliness  and 
their  asceticism,  they  were  far  nearer  the  younger  than 
the  older  reformer.  It  is,  therefore,  no  accident  that  in 
spite  of  their  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  predestination, 
and  their  emphasis  upon  human  freedom,  they  had  much 


VI.]  THE  RADICAL  SECTS  107 

larger  and  more  lasting  influence  within  the  Reformed 
wing  of  Protestantism  than  within  the  Lutheran.  They 
got  a  permanent  foothold  at  an  early  day  in  Holland, 
where  they  took  the  name  of  Mennonites,  from  Menno 
Simons,  one  of  the  leading  Anabaptists  of  the  sixteenth 
century ;  and  the  IndexDcndents,  who  have  played  so 
important  a  part  in  the  life  of  England,  and  particularly 
of  New  England,  since  the  seventeenth  century,  owed 
their  inception  to  them. 

n.  The  Socinians 

Like  Anabaptism,  Socinianism  was  in  part,  but  only  in 
part,  the  fruit  of  the  Protestant  Reformation.  Other 
and  independent  influences  had  still  more  to  do  with  it, 
but  those  influences  were  not,  as  in  the  case  of  Anabaptism, 
mystical  and  apocalyptic,  but  humanistic.  There  were 
humanists,  to  be  sure,  among  the  Anabaptists,  but  human- 
ism had  nothing  to  do  with  the  Anabaptist  movement  as  a 
whole,  while  in  Socinianism  its  influence  was  all-control- 
ling. Both  the  uncle,  Lsalius  Socinus,  and  the  nephew 
Faustus,  who  did  much  to  give  Socinianism  its  permanent 
character,  were  born  and  brought  up  in  Northern  Italy, 
where  the  humanistic  spirit  was  strong,  and  in  Poland, 
where  the  movement  first  gained  a  foothold,  and  enjoyed 
its  largest  development,  humanism  was  widespread  and 
influential.  Socinianism,  in  fact,  was  the  earliest  organ- 
ised expression  of  the  humanistic  spirit  in  religion.  Its 
principles  were  largely  of  humanistic  rather  than  Protestant 
origin,  but  many  of  its  leaders,  like  large  numbers  of  the 
Anabaptists,  were  originally  Protestants  who  broke  with 
the  reformers  because  they  believed  the  latter  were  not 
giving  their  own  principles  consistent  application.  This 
fact,  together  with  the  community  of  interest  due  to 
common  opposition  to  the  Roman  Catholic  establishment, 
led  the  Socinians  to  regard  themselves  as  Protestants, 


108  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

even  though  they  repudiated  the  fundamental  doctrines 
of  the  reformers,  and  were  condemned  and  disowned  by  all 
other  Protestant  bodies. 

The  Socinians  were  by  no  means  the  only  anti-Trini- 
tarians of  the  sixteenth  century.  As  the  fundamental 
dogma  in  the  historic  Catholic  system,  the  Trinity  had 
long  been  a  favourite  object  of  attack  by  theological 
radicals.  The  sixteenth  century  witnessed  many  such 
attacks,  both  from  Catholics  and  Protestants.  Most  of 
them,  however  interesting  and  instructive,  were  of  little 
historical  importance,  and  none  of  them  would  have  had 
any  appreciable  influence  upon  the  development  of 
Protestant  thought  had  it  not  been  for  Faustus  Socinus, 
who  succeeded  in  gathering  the  Unitarians  of  Poland  into 
a  strong  and  compact  sect  which  bore  the  name  of  Polish 
Brethren,'  and  which  had  a  long  and  honourable  history. 
He  succeeded  also  in  freeing  the  sect  from  the  Anabaptist 
tendencies  with  which  Unitarianism  in  Poland  was  widely 
involved,  and  in  giving  it  an  independent  character  of  its 
own.  He  had  himself  no  sympathy  with  the  prevailing 
spirit  of  the  Anabax^tists.  Neither  their  social  ideals  nor 
their  ethical  and  religious  principles  appealed  to  him. 
There  was  nothing  either  of  the  mystic  or  of  the  fanatic 
about  him,  nor  indeed  of  the  social  revolutionist  or  reformer, 
and  the  Socinian  system  which  he  impressed  upon  the  sect 
he  did  so  much  to  organise  was  in  its  dominating  spirit 
and  interest  totally  unlike  Anabaptism,  in  spite  of  their 
common  rejection  of  some  traditional  doctrines. 

The  principles  of  the  Socinians  may  be  gathered  from 
the  writings  of  their  leaders,  particularly  of  Faustus 
Socinus,  1  and  also  most  easily  from  the  Racovian  Catechisniy'^ 

1  The  works  of  Faustus  Sociuus  are  published  in  the  first  two  volumes  of 
the  Bihliotheca  Fratruvi  Polonoruvi,  Amsterilani,  1656. 

2  The  first  edition  was  published  in  1605  in  Polish.  In  1608  a  German 
translation  was  issued,  and  in  lb09  a  Latin  version.  An  English  transl.itiou 
by  Thomas  Rees,  based  upon  a  revised  ami  enlarged  Latin  edition  of  16S0, 
was  published  in  1818.  It  is  from  this  translation  that  the  quotations  in  the 
text  are  taken. 


71.]  THE  RADICAL  SECTS  109 

which  was  pubHshed  in  1605,  shortly  after  Socinus' 
death. 

Fundamental  in  the  teaching  of  the  Socinians  was  the 
moral  ability  of  man.  Like  the  humanists  in  general, 
they  had  a  controlling  ethical  interest,  and  it  seemed  to 
them  essential  to  moral  living  that  a  man  should  have 
adequate  native  power  and  freedom  of  wall  to  choose  and 
follow  virtue  for  himself.  Nothing  could  be  more  striking 
than  the  contrast  betw^een  the  Socinians  and  the  Protestant 
reformers  at  this  point,  and  nothing  better  illustrates  their 
difference  of  spirit  and  interest.  Upon  the  absolute 
bondage  of  the  human  will  and  the  utter  inability  of  the 
natural  man  to  do  anything  good,  Luther  laid  the  greatest 
stress,  and  his  attitude  became  characteristic  of  the 
Reformation  movement  as  a  whole.  The  Socinians,  on 
the  other  hand,  asserted  man's  freedom  in  the  strongest 
possible  terms  (cf.  Bacovian  Catechism,  sec.  5,  chap.  x.). 
Unless  he  is  free  he  is  not  responsible  for  his  acts,  and  no 
moral  quality  can  be  ascribed  to  them. 

Consistently  with  their  attitude  in  this  matter,  the 
Socinians  rejected  the  doctrine  of  divine  predestination, 
which  was  a  fundamental  tenet  with  all  the  leading  re- 
formers. To  quote  from  the  Bacovian  Catechism  (sec.  5, 
chap.  X.)  :  '  If ,  as  you  state,  there  be  free  will,  how  comes 
it  to  pass  that  so  many  deny  it  ?  They  do  this  because 
they  think  they  have  certain  testimonies  of  Scripture, 
wherefrom  they  imagine  they  can  make  it  appear  that 
there  is  no  free  will  in  those  things  of  which  I  have  spoken. 
"VMiat  are  those  testimonies  ?  They  are  of  two  kinds  : 
the  one,  from  which  they  persuade  themselves  that  they 
can  infer  this  ;  the  other,  by  which  they  conceive  that 
free  will  is  expressly  taken  away.  Which  are  those 
testimonies  whence  they  endeavour  to  infer  this  ?  All 
those  that  treat  of  the  predestination  of  God.  .  .  .  What 
is  your  opinion  of  this  matter  ?  That  this  notion  of  pre- 
destination is  altogether  false — and  principally  for  two 


110  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

reasons,  whereof  one  is  tliat  it  would  necessarily  destroy 
all  religion,  and  the  other  that  it  would  ascribe  to  God 
many  things  incompatible  with  His  nature.  Show  me  how 
the  admission  of  this  opinion  would  altogether  destroy 
true  religion  ?  This  is  evident  from  hence,  that  all 
things  relating  to  faith  and  religion  would  be  in  us  from 
necessity  ;  and  if  this  were  the  case,  there  would  be  no 
need  of  our  efforts  and  labours  in  order  to  be  pious.  For 
all  exertion  and  application  is  wholly  superfluous  where  all 
things  are  done  through  necessity,  as  reason  itself  shows. 
But  if  exertion  and  application  be  taken  away  from  piety 
and  religion,  piety  and  religion  must  perish  '  (p.  332). 

Similarly  the  Socinians  rejected  the  traditional  doctrine 
of  original  sin,  as  accepted  both  by  Catholics  and  Protest- 
ants, asserting  that  man  was  created  mortal,  not  immortal, 
and  that  he  lost  neither  life  nor  freedom  by  Adam's  fall.^ 
He  is  still  able  to  obey  the  commands  of  God  as  Adam  was  ; 
his  nature  is  not  corrupt  any  more  than  was  Adam's  ;  and 
he,  therefore,  does  not  need  to  be  regenerated  and  trans- 
formed by  divine  power.  The  whole  Catholic  system  of 
redemption  thus  became  unnecessary,  and  it  is  character- 
istic of  the  Socinian  intellectualism  that,  finding  it  to  be 
so,  they  repudiated  it  unhesitatingly. 

An  essential  element  in  the  Catholic  theory  of  redemp- 
tion was  the  traditional  doctrine  of  the  atonement,  which 
the  reformers  took  over  from  the  theologians  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  This  doctrine  was  one  of  the  principal  objects  of 
attack  on  the  part  of  the  Socinians,  and  their  criticism  of 
it  was  often  very  acute.^  God's  nature,  they  claimed, 
is  such  that  He  is  in  no  way  bound  to  an  atonement  in 
order  that  He  may  forgive  sin.  He  is  free  to  forgive  with 
or  without  conditions,  and  hence  the  most  telling  argu- 
ment for  the  traditional  substitutionary  theory  falls  to 

1  Cf,  Racovian  Catechism,  p.  325  sq.  ;  and  Socinus's  De  Statu  primi  hominis 
ante  lapsum.  Opera,  vol.  ii.  p.  253  sq. 

*  See  Socinus's  De  Jesu  Christo  ServatorCf  02)era,  vol.  ii.  p.  121  sq. ;  and 
Racovian  Catechism,  sec.  5,  chap.  viii. 


VI.]  THE  RADICAL  SECTS  111 

the  ground.  Christ's  work  consists  in  reconciling  men  to 
God  rather  than  God  to  men ;  it  is  His  influence  on  men 
rather  than  on  God  that  is  important. 

With  the  necessity  of  transforming  the  nature  of  man 
by  the  divine  indwelhng,  and  of  making  atonement  in 
order  that  God  might  forgive,  went  the  traditional  basis 
for  the  belief  in  the  deity  of  Christ,  and  the  Socinians 
were  entirely  consistent  in  attacking  that  belief.  They 
carried  their  opposition  so  far  as  to  reject  also  the  doctrines 
of  pre-existence  and  incarnation.  They  were  more  radical 
even  than  the  Arians,  setting  over  against  the  historic 
theory  of  Christ's  person,  not  the  doctrine  of  a  pre-existent 
divine  being  lower  than  God,  who  became  incarnate,  but 
the  man  Jesus  Christ,  whose  true  humanity  and  genuine 
moral  development  gave  His  life  a  real  ethical  value  for 
all  His  followers. 

The  deity  of  Christ  constituted  the  essential  element 
in  the  historic  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  With  the  former, 
therefore,  went  the  latter.^  Here  we  come  upon  the  most 
notorious  feature  of  Socinianism — the  rejection  of  the 
dogma  of  the  Trinity.  It  would  be  a  mistake,  however, 
to  suppose  that  this  was  its  fundamental  interest.  There 
were  many  anti-Trinitarians  of  the  day  who  found  in  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  their  principal  point  of  attack,  and 
doubtless  not  a  few  of  them  became  Socinians.  But  the 
interest  which  controlled  Socinus  himself,  and  the  sect 
as  a  whole,  was  deeper  than  this.  The  assault  upon  the 
Trinity  was  only  an  incident  in  a  much  larger  campaign. 
Socinus  himself  says  that  while  he  thinks  it  well  to  know 
the  truth  in  this  matter,  no  one  will  be  lost  because  he 
accepts  the  doctrine  so  long  as  it  does  not  interfere  with 
his  worship  and  service  of  the  one  true  God.^  And  accord- 
ingly, while  in  the  Racovian  Catechism  large  space  is  de- 
voted to  showing  that  the  traditional  belief  in  the  deity 

1  Cf.  Racovian  Catechism^  sec.  3,  chap.  i. 

*  Opera,  voL  i.  p.  652  •  cf.  also  Racovian  Catechism,  p.  46, 


112  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [en. 

of  Christ  is  erroneous,  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is  dis- 
missed in  a  few  paragraphs  (sec.  3,  chap.  i.).  That  the 
Socinians  are  known  as  Unitarians,  and  justly  so,  shDuld 
not  mislead  us,  therefore,  into  supposing  that  anti-Trini- 
tarianism  was  their  primary  interest.  It  was  only  a 
corollary  of  positions  much  more  vital  and  fundamental. 

With  the  rest  of  the  Catholic  system  of  redemption  went 
also  the  traditional  doctrine  of  the  Church  and  the  sacra- 
ments as  means  of  grace.  The  Church  is  simply  the  com* 
munity  of  those  who  embrace  saving  doctrme.^  Baptism 
is  only  a  sign  and  pledge  of  faith  and  obedience  on 
man's  part,  and  the  Lord's  Supper  nothing  more  than  a 
commemoration  of  the  death  of  Christ. ^ 

It  is  evident  that  the  Socinians  were  remarkably  con- 
sistent in  the  application  of  humanistic  principles  to 
Christian  theology,  and  yet  their-  consistency  was  not 
complete.  Their  changed  estimate  of  man  led  to  the 
rejection  of  the  traditional  system  of  redemption  with  all 
that  it  involved,  but  the  modern  spirit  which  voiced  it- 
self in  that  estimate  found  only  limited  expression  after 
all,  for  instead  of  declaring  that  man  is  entirely  sufficient 
to  himself,  they  asserted  his  absolute  need  of  light  from 
above  in  order  that  he  might  know  the  way  of  life  and 
salvation,  which  would  otherwise  be  hidden  from  him. 
\  In  other  words,  while  they  insisted  upon  the  moral  ability 
of  man,  they  denied  the  sufficiency  of  his  knowledge.  It 
is  true  that  they  made  much  of  the  power  and  authority 
of  human  reason.  Like  the  humanists  in  general,  they 
insisted  that  in  religion,  as  in  all  other  matters,  human 
reason  has  a  necessary  place.  In  the  Racovian  Catechism, 
in  response  to  the  question,  '  Of  what  use  then  is  right 
reason,  if  it  be  of  any,  in  those  matters  which  relate  to 
salvation  ?  '  it  is  said  :  '  It  is  indeed  of  great  service,  since 
without  it  we  could  neither  perceive  with  certainty  the 
authority  of  the  sacred  writings,  understand  their  con- 

1  Racovian  Catechism,  sec.  viii.  chap.  L        2  ihid.  sec.  v.  chaps,  iii.  and  iv 


Ti.]  THE  RADICAL  SECTS  113 

tents,  discriminate  one  thing  from  another,  nor  apply 
them  to  any  practical  purpose.  When,  therefore,  I  stated 
that  the  Holy  Scriptures  were  sufficient  for  our  salvation, 
so  far  from  excluding  right  reason,  I  certainly  assumed 
its  presence'  (sec.  1,  chap.  ii.).  In  accordance  with  this 
principle  the  Socinians  used  rational  arguments  on  a  large 
scale  in  attacking  traditional  doctrines.  Indeed,  the 
irrationality  of  the  existing  system  was  one  of  their 
principal  grounds  of  hostility  to  it.  All  would-be  religious 
truth,  like  alleged  truth  in  any  other  sphere,  must  submit 
to  the  judgment  of  the  human  mind.  Nothing  contrary 
to  reason  can  possibly  be  true  in  religion  any  more  than 
anywhere  else.  We  have  here  another  point  of  contrast 
between  the  Socinians  and  the  Protestant  reformers, 
particularly  Luther.  He  spoke  with  great  contempt  of 
the  human  reason,  and  denounced  both  schoolmen  and 
humanists  because  they  depended  upon  it;  and  while 
in  this  he  was  more  extreme  than  most  of  his  associates, 
the  depreciation  of  natural  reason  in  connection  T\dth 
divine  things  was  characteristic  of  the  Reformation  move- 
ment as  a  whole.  As  a  consequence  the  rationalism  of  the 
Socinians  was  widely  condemned  by  the  Protestant 
divines  of  the  day,  and  was  made  one  of  the  chief  counts 
in  the  orthodox  indictment  of  them. 

And  yet,  in  spite  of  their  rationalism,  the  Socinians 
denied  that  human  reason  is  enough  to  guide  a  man  in  the 
way  of  life  and  salvation.  Every  one  must  be  enlightened 
from  above  if  he  is  not  to  perish  eternally.  In  the  Racovian 
Catechism  it  is  said  :  *  As  you  stated  at  the  commence- 
ment that  the  way  which  leads  to  immortality  was  pointed 
out  by  God,  I  wish  to  know  why  you  made  this  assertion  ? 
Because  man  is  not  only  obnoxious  to  death,  but  could 
not  of  himself  discover  a  way  to  avoid  it,  and  that  should 
infallibly  conduct  to  immortality.'  '  How  do  you  prove 
that  he  could  not  of  himself  discover  the  way  by  which 
he  might  avoid  death,  and  which  would  infallibly  conduct 

H 


114  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [oh. 

him  to  immortality  ?  This  may  be  seen  from  hence, 
that  so  glorious  a  recompense,  and  the  sure  means  of 
obtaining  it,  must  wholly  depend  on  the  will  and  counsel 
of  God.  But  this  will  and  counsel,  what  human  being 
can  explore  and  clearly  ascertain,  unless  they  be  revealed 
by  God  Himself  ?  '  (sec.  2,  chap.  i.). 

It  was  in  accordance  with  this  conception  of  human 
need  that  the  Socinians  interpreted  Christianity.  The 
Racovian  Catechism  opens  with  the  words  :  '  I  wish  to  be 
informed  by  you  what  the  Christian  religion  is  ?  The 
Christian  religion  is  the  way  of  attaining  eternal  life  which 
God  has  pointed  out  by  Jesus  Christ,  or,  in  other  words, 
it  is  the  method  of  serving  God  which  He  has  Himself 
delivered  by  Jesus  Christ.'  Man's  supreme  duty  is  to 
serve  God,  who  will  reward  the  obedient  with  eternal  life, 
and  punish  the  disobedient  with  eternal  death.  How 
God  is  to  be  served  no  one  can  discover  for  himself ;  He 
is  an  absolute  sovereign,  and  has  the  right  to  demand 
such  service  as  He  pleases,  so  long  as  it  is  not  *  in  its  own 
nature  evil  and  imjust '  (sec.  3,  chap.  i.).  What  that 
service  may  be  we  can  learn  only  from  God.  Divine 
revelation  is,  therefore,  unconditionally  necessary,  and  is 
supplied  by  Christianity.  Christ's  supreme  work  was  that 
of  a  prophet,  to  declare  both  by  precept  and  example 
God's  will  for  men.  That  it  was  truly  the  divine  will 
which  he  declared  is  proved  by  the  holiness  of  his  life,  by 
His  miracles,  and  by  His  death  and  resurrection.  To  the 
Christian  conscience,  or  to  the  inner  experience  of  forgive- 
ness and  salvation,  no  appeal  is  made  in  support  of 
Christianity.  Tlie  evidences  that  it  is  of  God  are  wholly 
external,  particularly  the  supernatural  elements  in  the 
life  of  Christ. 

Consistently  with  the  conception  of  Christ's  work  as 
chiefly  that  of  a  revealer  of  God's  will,  more  than  half  of 
the  Racovian  Catechism  is  devoted  to  his  prophetic  office, 
under  which  head  are  treated  such  subjects  as  the  precepts 


vl]  the  radical  sects  115 

of  Christ,  including  the  Ten  Commandments  as  interpreted 
by  Him,  Baptism,  the  Lord's  Supper,  eternal  life,  the 
promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  death  of  Christ,  faith,  free 
will,  and  justification.  The  attempt  was  made — though 
it  was  not  carried  through  consistently  at  all  points — 
to  view  the  whole  Christian  system  under  this  aspect ;  its 
one  great  significance  is  that  it  is  a  revelation  of  the  will 
of  God  and  a  promise  of  a  blessed  immortaHty  to  those 
living  in  accordance  therewith.  The  Socinian  notion  of 
the  Christian  life  was  legal  to  the  last  degree.  To  be  a 
Christian  is  simply  to  know  and  do  the  will  of  God  re- 
vealed by  Christ.  Faith  is  a  motive  leading  man  to 
obedience,  and  unless  followed  thereby  it  is  of  no  avail. 
Knowledge  and  conduct  are  the  two  essential  elements. 
For  them  who  know  and  do  is  the  reward,  but  only  for  them. 

The  Christian  revelation,  a  knowledge  of  which  is 
necessary  to  salvation,  is  contained  in  the  Scriptures  alone. 
The  Bible,  especially  the  New  Testament,  is  a  divine  book, 
authoritative  in  all  its  parts,  and  from  it  alone  the  will  of 
God  can  be  learned.  Extended  arguments  for  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  New  Testament,  all  of  an  external  character, 
are  given  in  the  first  section  of  the  Catechism,  and  the  Old 
Testament  is  accepted  on  the  testimony  of  the  New.  Both 
are  appealed  to  in  support  of  the  teachings  of  the  Catechisniy 
but  the  New  Testament  far  more  largely  than  the  Old. 
The  Socinians  made  thoroughgoing  work  of  the  principle 
of  Biblical  authority.  It  was  no  mere  form  of  speech  with 
them ;  it  was  taken  in  the  most  serious  possible  way. 
Christianity  became  in  their  hands  more  completely  than 
ever  before  a  book  religion.  Not  from  the  traditions  of 
the  Church,  not  from  communications  of  the  Spirit  to  this 
or  other  ages,  and  not  from  the  Christian  consciousness, 
individual  or  collective,  is  the  will  of  God  to  be  learned, 
but  from  the  Bible  alone,  the  one  and  only  revelation 
vouchsafed  to  men. 

The  rationalism  of  the  Socinians  did  not  in  any  way 


116  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

interfere  with  their  recognition  of  the  authority  of  the 
Scriptures,  but  it  did  affect  their  interpretation  of  them. 
Whatever  God  has  revealed  must  be  rational.  The 
Scotist  divorce  between  the  reason  of  man  and  the  reason 
of  God,  the  Socinians  did  not  admit.  It  is  often  said  that 
their  view  of  God  was  taken  from  the  Scotists,  but  this  is 
an  error.  They  emphasised  God's  absolute  will,  and 
unconditional  sovereignty,  but  they  denied  that  He  could 
act  inconsistently  with  sound  reason  any  more  than  with 
right  and  Justice,  and  they  believed  that  sound  reason 
is  one  in  God  and  man.  The  Bible,  therefore,  must  be 
interpreted  by  the  light  of  reason.  It  can  contain  nothing 
irrational,  and  to  deduce  from  it  teaching  that  does  violence 
to  our  sense  of  the  fitness  of  things  is  to  misinterpret  it. 
The  application  of  this  criterion  to  the  reading  of  the 
Scriptures  meant  in  many  cases  a  decided  advance  upon 
traditional  exegesis,  but  in  other  cases  flagrant  misunder- 
standing. In  their  interpretation  of  the  synoptic  gospels, 
for  instance,  the  Socinians  were  as  a  rule  far  sounder 
than  most  Catholic  and  Protestant  exegetes.  But  when 
it  came  to  Paul  and  John,  their  mysticism  was  so  foreign 
to  the  Socinian  way  of  looking  at  things  that  they  were 
very  commonly  misinterpreted.  With  the  miraculous 
element  in  the  Biblical  records,  the  Socinians  had  no 
trouble;  they  believed  in  the  supernatural  as  firmly 
as  any  of  their  contemporaries.  But  they  were  ethically, 
not  religiously,  interested,  and  with  the  mystical  element 
in  Christian  experience  they  had  no  sympathy.  It  was, 
therefore,  inevitable  that  they  should  be  quite  blind  to 
certain  features  of  Biblical  teaching.  But  they  were 
none  the  less  sincere  in  their  recognition  of  Scriptural 
authority,  and  none  the  less  zealous  in  their  conformity 
to  what  they  believed  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  word. 
In  fact,  they  carried  their  loyalty  to  the  Scriptures  so  far 
that  they  accepted  many  doctrines,  and  retained  many 
practices,  simply  because  they  found  them  in  the  Bible, 


VI.]  THE  RADICAL  SECTS  117 

and  not  a  few  of  these  were  out  of  line  with  their  control' 
ling  principles.  Thus,  for  instance,  although  they  denied 
Christ's  pre-existence,  and  insisted  that  the  one  important 
thing  to  know  about  Him  was  that  He  had  a  real  human 
nature, 1  they  yet  accepted  the  Virgin  birth,^  and  held  that 
Christ  ascended  to  heaven  before  His  public  ministry,  and 
there  learned  the  revelation  which  He  afterward  communi- 
cated to  the  world.^  They  also  taught  that  He  was  ex- 
alted to  the  right  hand  of  God  after  His  resurrection,  and 
became  Priest  and  King  and  Judge  of  all  men,  and  they 
insisted  that  divine  worship  should  be  paid  Him.  On  this 
last  point  there  was  a  difference  of  opinion  among  the  early 
Unitarians  of  Poland,  but  the  worship  of  Christ  was  main- 
tained by  Socinus  himself  and  the  majority  of  the  Socinian 
sect.* 

Upon  the  authority  of  the  Bible,  too,  they  made  many 
statements  about  the  work  of  Christ,  which  it  is  difficult 
to  harmonise  with  their  general  attitude  upon  the  subject. 
They  spoke  of  Him  as  a  mediator,  a  propitiation,  an 
expiation,  a  satisfaction,  an  offering,  a  sacrifice,  and  so  on.^ 
They  also  made  use  of  the  conception  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
though  they  denied  his  personality,  and  they  talked  about 
the  inspiration  and  strength  for  virtuous  living  which  the 
Spirit  imparts  to  Christian  believers.^  They  likewise 
retained  baptism,  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  evidently  only 
because  found  in  the  New  Testament.  In  all  these  cases 
they  attempted  to  interpret  the  phrases  they  quoted,  and 
the  ideas  and  practices  they  adopted,  in  accordance  with 
their  general  view  of  Christianity,  and  even  in  some  cases 
to  give  them  a  real  significance.  But  often  the  disparity 
was  too  great  and  the  inconsistencies  were  left  unresolved. 
Their  effort  to  see  in  Christianity  nothing  but  a  revelation 
of  the  divine  will,  and  to  reconstruct  the  whole  Christian 


1  Racovian  Catechism,  p.  61  so,  *  Ihid.  p. 

»  Ibid.  p.  170.  *  Cf.  ihid. 

•  Ibid.  pp.  297  sq.,  349  tq.  •  Ibid,  pp 


53. 

p.  189  sq. 
284  42.,324jjr. 


118  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

system  from  that  point  of  view,  broke  down,  in  fact, 
simply  because  of  their  loyal  adherence  to  the  text  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  the  result  was  a  curious  medley  of  disparate 
and  often  inconsistent  elements. 

Socinianism  was  condemned  by  the  Protestant  Churches, 
both  Reformed  and  Lutheran,  but  it  left  its  mark  upon 
them.  After  being  driven  out  of  Poland  in  1661,  when 
the  Government  became  Roman  Catholic,  the  sect  lost 
its  corporate  existence,  but  many  found  their  way  to 
Holland,  where  their  principles  bore  considerable  fruit. 
Their  respect  for  the  Bible,  and  their  rejection  of  a  large 
part  of  the  traditional  system  because  of  its  un-Biblical 
character,  tended  to  enhance  the  credit  of  the  Scriptures, 
whose  authority  was  recognised  even  by  so  radical  a  sect, 
and  at  the  same  time  provoked  inquiry  as  to  the  Scriptural 
basis  for  existing  doctrines.  Biblical  study  was  thus 
greatly  forwarded  by  their  challenge. 

On  the  other  hand,  wherever  they  went  they  promoted 
a  more  humanistic  way  of  looking  at  things.  Uncon- 
ditional election  and  the  complete  bondage  of  the  will 
came  to  be  questioned  far  beyond  the  confines  of  Socinian- 
ism itself.  There  can  be  no  doubt  for  instance  that 
Arminianism  was,  in  part  at  least,  the  fruit  of  Socinian 
influence.  In  general  it  may  be  said  that  the  rationalism 
of  the  Socinians,  limited  as  it  was,  yet  made  its  influence 
widely  felt,  fostering  in  some  cases  a  more,  in  others  a  less, 
extreme  radicalism  than  they  themselves  represented. 
By  their  criticism  of  the  existing  theological  system,  both 
on  Bibhcal  and  rational  grounds,  they  undermined  its 
credit  in  many  quarters,  and  hastened  the  day  of  its 
disintegratioQ. 


VII.]  THE  EiSlOLISH  KEFOEMAIION  119 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  ENGLISH  REFORMATION 

England's  break  with  Rome,  which  came  under  Hemy 
vm.,  and  at  his  instance,  was  made  possible,  if  it  was  not 
directly  caused,  by  many  influences.  Discontent  with  the 
encroachments  of  the  papacy,  growing  national  feeling, 
popular  dislike  of  the  clergy,  united  to  weaken  the  hold 
of  the  old  Church.  LoUardy,  with  its  anti-ecclesiasticism, 
and  its  emphasis  upon  the  authority  of  the  Bible,  in  spite 
of  repression  and  persecution,  was  still  a  force  in  many 
quarters,  and  humanism  had  its  representatives  and 
champions  in  England  as  well  as  on  the  Continent.  The 
writings  of  Luther  were  widely  read,  and  his  opinions  early 
gained  considerable  vogue,  especially  in  university  circles. 
Henry  was,  therefore,  acting  in  accordance  with  a  wide- 
spread and  growing  sentiment  among  his  subjects  when  he 
forced  the  break  with  Rome,  and  the  establishment  of  a 
national  Church  of  England.  Religiously  and  theologi- 
cally, he  was  a  conservative.  He  wished  to  be  recognised 
as  the  supreme  head  of  the  English  Church,  but  he  desired 
no  change  in  either  doctrine  or  worship.  Had  it  been 
possible  he  would  have  retained  the  old  system  in  its 
completeness  with  the  single  exception  of  the  papacy. 
This,  however,  he  could  not  do.  It  was  natural  that  the 
chief  supporters  of  roj^al  supremacy  should  be  those  most 
imbued  with  Prctestant  principles;  to  disregard  alto- 
gether their  desire  for  a  reform  of  the  existing  system,  both 
in  doctrine  and  in  worship,  was  out  of  the  question. 


lao  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

In  1536,  two  years  after  the  adoption  by  Parliament 
of  the  Act  of  Supremacy,  which  completed  the  schism  with 
the  Church  of  Rome,  there  was  drawn  up  a  set  of  ten 
articles,  the  first  five  doctrinal  in  character,  the  others 
dealing  with  ecclesiastical  rites  and  ceremonies.  They 
were  published  under  the  title  of  '  Articles  devised  by  his 
King's  Highness  Majesty  to  establish  Christian  Quietness,' 
and  were  ordered  to  be  read  in  the  churches.  They  were 
conservative  in  spirit  and  denounced  radicalism,  both  in 
doctrine  and  worship,  but  they  emphasised  the  free  grace 
of  God  in  justification,  they  omitted  all  mention  of  tran- 
substantiation  in  the  account  of  the  Mass,  and  they  spoke 
of  the  Bible,  the  three  ecumenical  creeds,  and  the  decisions 
of  the  first  four  councils  as  the  supreme  doctrinal  standards. 
They  thus  looked  in  a  hesitating  way  in  the  direction  of 
Protestantism  without  breaking  at  any  decisive  point 
with  traditional  principles. 

In  the  royal  Injunctions  of  1538  the  clergy  were  directed 
to  see  that  a  copy  of  the  Bible  in  English  was  placed  in 
every  parish  church,  where  it  might  be  read  by  the  people, 
and  to  *  provoke,  stir,  and  exhort  every  person  to  read 
the  same  as  that  which  is  the  very  lively  word  of  God 
that  every  Christian  man  is  bound  to  embrace,  believe 
and  follow  if  he  look  to  be  saved.'^ 

In  1537  there  was  issued  by  the  archbishops  and  bishops, 
a  work  entitled  The  Institute  of  a  Christian  Man,  and 
commonly  called  the  Bishops'  Book,  which  consisted  of 
an  exposition  of  the  Creed,  the  sacraments,  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments, and  the  Lord's  Prayer. ^  It  represented  very 
much  the  same  point  of  view  as  the  Ten  Articles,  but  went 
beyond  them  in  denying  the  doctrine  of  Purgatory. 

In  1539,  on  the  other  hand,  in  consequence  of  popular 
insurrections  caused  in  part  by  the  religious  innovations, 
particularly   the  dissolution   of  the   monasteries,   Parlia- 

1  Quoted  from  Gee  and  Hardy's  Documents,  p.  276. 

»  Reprinted  in  Formularies  of  Faith  put  forth  by  authority  during  t?M 
rtign  of  Henry  VIII.    Oxford,  1825. 


VII.]  THE  ENGLISH  REFORMATION  121 

ment  passed  a  reactionary  act  '  for  the  abolishing  of 
diversity  in  reUgion,'  commonly  known  as  the  Six  Articles' 
Law.  In  it  transubstantiation  was  explicitly  afl&rmed, 
and  the  denial  of  it  made  punishable  by  death  ;  the  need- 
lessness  of  communion  in  both  kinds,  and  the  binding 
character  of  vows  of  chastity  were  asserted,  private 
Masses  approved,  and  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy  and 
auricular  confession  made  obligatory.  In  1543  a  revised 
edition  of  the  Bishops'  Book  was  published  under  the  title 
of  The  Necessary  Erudition  of  a  Christian  Man?-  This  was 
known  as  the  King's  Book,  and  was  intended  to  supersede 
the  earlier  work.  It  was  thoroughly  Catholic  in  its  spirit 
and  tendency,  and  lacked  all  the  traces  of  Protestantism 
which  had  marked  the  Bishops'  Book. 

The  via  media  thus  established  the  king  succeeded  in 
maintaining  during  the  rest  of  his  reign,  though  it  pro- 
bably satisfied  very  few  of  his  subjects.  On  the  one 
hand,  devout  Catholics  wished  to  restore  the  papal  supre- 
macy, and  on  the  other  hand  convinced  Protestants,  whose 
number  was  steadily  increasing,  wished  to  revolutionise 
the  traditional  system. 

Under  Edward  vi.  the  Protestant  party  had  the  ascend- 
ency in  the  government,  and  the  new  faith  was  given 
practical  expression  in  many  ways.  The  Six  Articles' 
Law  was  repealed,  images  were  removed  from  the  churches, 
and  the  invocation  of  saints  forbidden.  A  book  of  homihes 
was  published,  similar  to  the  Bishops'  Book,  but  more 
decidedly  Protestant,  the  administration  of  the  Communion 
in  both  kinds  was  commanded,  clerical  marriage  was  per- 
mitted, and  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  was  issued  and 
made  the  only  lawful  service  book  of  the  English  Church.* 
Finally,  forty-two  articles  of  religion  were  framed  and  put 

1  Also  reprinted  in  Formularies  of  Faith,  etc. 

'  By  Edward's  first  Act  of  Uniformity  passed  by  Parliament  in  January 
1549.  A  second  and  revised  edition  of  the  Prayer  Book  was  substituted  for 
tiie  first  by  the  second  Act  of  Uniformity,  January  1562.  The  two  Acta  «• 
given  by  Gee  and  Hardy,  pp.  358  ff.  and  369  ft. 


122  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

forth  by  royal  authority  as  the  official  confession  of  faith. ^ 
Before  they  got  into  general  use,  Edward's  elder  sister 
Mary,  a  devout  Catholic  and  papist,  came* to  the  throne, 
and  a  reaction  took  place,  resulting  in  the  temporary  re- 
establishment  of  the  old  system  and  the  bitter  persecution 
of  the  adherents  of  the  new  regime. 

Mary  was  succeeded  in  1558  by  her  half-sister  Elizabeth, 
daughter  of  Anne  Boleyn,  the  necessities  of  whose  position 
required  her  to  repudiate  the  authority  of  the  Pope,  and 
to  maintain  the  royal  supremacy  and  the  independence 
of  the  English  Church.  It  was  impossible,  even  had  it 
been  desired,  to  restore  the  condition  of  things  that  ex- 
isted in  the  later  years  of  Henry  viii.  Protestantism  had 
grown  so  strong  in  the  country  at  large  that  it  was  neces- 
sary to  give  the  English  establishment  a  far  more  Protestant 
character  than  Henry  would  have  approved.  It  is  true 
that  both  Elizabeth  and  her  government  were  more  con- 
servative than  Edward's  Council  of  Regency,  and  the 
Protestantising  process  was  not  carried  so  far  as  it  doubt- 
less would  have  been  had  Edward  remained  longer  on  the 
throne.  Still,  practically  all  that  was  accomplished  under 
Edward  was  ratified  under  Elizabeth,  and  in  polity, 
worship,  and  doctrine,  the  English  Church  was  given  the 
general  character  which  it  has  borne  ever  since.  Episco- 
pacy was  retained.  The  Prayer  Book  was  re-issued  with 
some  minor  changes,  its  use  was  made  obligatory  in  all 
churches,  and  worship  by  any  other  form  was  prohibited.'^ 
The  forty-two  articles  were  revised  and  reduced  to 
thirty-nine,  and  assent  to  them  was  required  of  all  clergy- 
men.' 

1  The  forty-two  articles  received  Edward's  signature  in  June  1553  and  he 
died  the  following  month.  On  the  articles  see  Hard  wick's  History  of  the 
Articles  of  Religion,  revised  edition,  1859. 

2  By  the  Act  of  UniforTiiity  of  1559,  given  by  Gee  and  Hardy,  p.  488  sq. 

'  The  thirty-nine  articles  were  approved   by  Convocation  in  1563,  and 


issued  by  royal  authority  without  the  twenty-ninth  article  on  tlie  eatiug  of 

body  by  the  wicked.     In  1571  Parliament  pa 
Act   by  which   the  articles,   with  the  twenty-ninth  restored,    were  mad* 


Christ's  body  by  the  wicked.     In  1571  Parliament  passed  the  Subscription 
Act   by  which   the  articles,   with  the  twenty-ni 
permanently  binding  (see  Gee  and  Hardy,  p.  477). 


VII.]  THE  ENGLISH  REFORMATION  123 

The  Thirty-Nine  Articles  in  which  the  theology  of  the 
English  Reformation  received  final  expression,  were  simply 
a  revision  of  the  forty-two  of  Edward,  and  represented 
the  same  general  type  of  doctrine.  There  was  no  inde- 
pendent theological  thinking  in  England  during  the  period 
of  the  Reformation.  The  leaders  of  the  English  move- 
ment were  largely  engrossed  in  matters  of  government 
and  worship.  There  was  indeed  no  important  theologian 
among  them.  In  doctrinal  matters  they  followed  the 
Continental  reformers,  emphasising  the  positions  common 
to  all  of  them,  and  minimising  the  matters  in  which  the 
Lutheran  and  Reformed  theologians  disagreed.  They 
adopted  the  common  Augustinian  platform,  upon  which 
Luther,  as  well  as  Zmngli  and  Calvin,  stood,  and  the 
common  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith.  They  were 
Calvinistic  rather  than  Lutheran  in  their  view  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  perhaps  in  part  because  Bucer  spent  the 
last  three  years  of  his  life  as  a  professor  at  Cambridge, 
during  the  reign  of  Edward  vi.,  and  came  into  close 
relation  with  the  Protestant  leaders  of  the  day.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  was  the  more  conservative  Lutheran 
rather  than  the  more  radical  Reformed  idea  of  the 
authority  of  the  Church  that  finally  prevailed.  As  a 
result,  the  English  Reformation  bore  a  less  advanced 
character  than  the  Swiss.  Moreover,  the  theory  of  the 
relation  of  Church  and  State  was  Luther's  rather  than 
Calvin's.  The  supreme  authority  of  the  civil  power 
in  ecclesiastical  affairs  was  estabhshed  permanently, 
not,  to  be  sure,  as  a  result  of  Luther's  teaching, 
but  as  a  natural  consequence  of  the  situation  under 
Henry  vm. 

The  forty-two  articles  of  Edward,  which  were  in  the 
main  reproduced  in  the  thirty-nine  of  Elizabeth,  were 
based  upon  the  Augsburg  Confession  of  1530,  through  the 
medium  of  fifteen  articles  drawn  up  in  1538  by  a  com- 
mittee  of   German   and   English   theologians,   but    not 


124  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [oh. 

published.  In  the  revision  under  EHzabeth,  use  was  also 
made  of  the  Wiirttemberg  Confession  of  1552,  framed  by 
Brentius  and  other  Lutheran  theologians  for  presentation 
to  the  Council  of  Trent.  Both  the  Augsburg  and  Wiirttem- 
berg confessions  were  purposely  made  as  conservative 
and  conciHatory  as  possible,  their  aim  being  to  show 
Protestantism  in  the  most  favourable  light.  The  English 
articles  bear  in  part  the  same  general  stamp,  but  there  is 
more  evangelicalism  in  them,  and  they  are  explicit  and 
outspoken  on  some  subjects  not  touched  in  the  two  German 
confessions.  In  general,  it  may  be  said  that  they  were 
intended  to  be  a  reasonably  complete  statement  of  the 
Protestant  faith  as  accepted  by  the  Continental  churches, 
and  interpreted  in  England,  that  they  are  genuinely 
Protestant,  but  emphasise,  like  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
the  common  Catholic  faith,  and  warn  against  Protestant 
radicalism,  that  they  are  Augustinian,  but  moderately  so, 
and  that  they  belong  exclusively  to  neither  the  Lutheran 
nor  Reformed  wing  of  Protestantism,  except  in  the  doctrine 
of  the  Eucharist,  where  the  Calvinistic  view  is  stated 
without  repudiating  the  Lutheran  opinion.  The  state- 
ments concerning  the  rule  of  faith,  which  are  not  found 
in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  also  show  Reformed  influence, 
as  does  the  careful  and  judicious  article  on  predestination, 
which  is  likewise  lacking  in  the  earlier  creed.  Finally, 
it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  articles  are  eminently  practical, 
not  speculative  in  interest,  and  guard  carefully  against 
practical  radicalism,  particularly  antinomianism.  On 
the  whole,  they  constitute  one  of  the  very  best  symbols 
of  the  Reformation,  and,  at  the  time  they  were  framed, 
were  admirably  adapted  for  a  State  church,  in  which  it  was 
necessary  to  comprehend  as  many  divergent  views  as 
possible.  There  would  have  been  no  serious  Protestant 
nonconformity  in  England  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth 
centuries  on  the  ground  of  the  articles  alone.  They 
stated  the  common  platform  so  sanely  and  moderately 


rii.]  THE  ENGLISH  REFORMATION  126 

that  most  Protestants  could  find  no  particular  fault  with 

them.^ 

It  was  during  the  reign  of  Elizabeth  that  the  Puritan 
controversy  began  to  distract  the  English  church.  From 
the  beginning  of  the  Reformation  there  were  two  divergent 
opinions  as  to  the  proper  attitude  toward  the  old  system. 
Some  believed  that  only  by  complete  repudiation  of 
traditional  forms  and  ceremonies  could  Protestantism 
permanently  maintain  itself,  while  others  dreaded  the 
unsettling  effects  of  too  radical  a  change.  The  former 
maintained  that  nothing  should  be  allowed  in  doctrine, 
worship,  or  pohty  which  was  not  approved  by  Scripture 
or  fairly  deducible  therefrom.  The  latter,  while  recognis- 
ing the  binding  authority  of  the  Bible  in  the  matter  of 
doctrine,  held  that  in  worship  and  polity  the  Church  had 
the  right  to  determine  its  own  conduct  provided  it  did  not 
contradict  Scriptural  teaching.  The  latter  was  Luther's 
principle,  the  former  Zwingli's  and  Calvin's.  In  England 
the  more  conservative  position  prevailed  in  the  beginning, 
but  there  were  not  wanting  representatives  of  the  other 
view,  and  already  in  the  reign  of  Edward  vi.  they  began 
to  cause  trouble.  Under  Elizabeth  the  controversy 
waxed  warm.  It  was  originally  confined  for  the  most 
part  to  the  sphere  of  worship,  and  had  to  do  with  forms, 
ceremonies  and  vestments,  but  gradually  it  involved 
the  whole  question  of  the  nature  and  government  of  the 
Church  and  its  relation  to  the  State.  In  the  first  of  the 
Admonitions  to  Parliament  (1572),  which  was  written  by 
Field  and  Wilcox,  and  constituted  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant Puritan  manifestoes  of  the  day,  although  there  was 
a  discussion  of  forms  of  worship  and  clerical  vestments, 
it  was  said,  '  Neither  is  the  controversy  between  them 

1  Compare  for  instance  the  remark  on  the  last  page  of  the  first  of  the 
famous  Puritan  Admonitions  to  Parliament  of  the  year  1572 :  *  For  the 
articles,  concerning  the  substance  of  doctrine,  using  a  godly  interpretation  in 
a  point  or  two,  which  are  either  too  sparely  or  else  too  darkly  Mt  down,  w« 
were  and  are  ready  according  to  duty  to  subscribe  unto  them.' 


126  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

and  us  as  for  a  cap,  a  tippet,  or  a  surplice,  but  for  great 
matters  concerning  a  true  ministry  and  regiment  of  the 
Church  according  to  the  Word.  Which  things  once  estab- 
lished, the  others  melt  away  of  themselves.'  And  in  the 
second  Admonition  of  the  same  year  from  the  pen  of 
Thomas  Cartwright,  the  polity  of  the  Church  was  made 
the  principal  subject  of  discussion.  In  this  document 
prelacy  was  attacked,  and  presbyterianism  declared  to 
be  the  only  lawful  government  because  taught  in  the 
Scriptures,  the  independence  of  the  Church  was  asserted, 
and  its  subjection  to  the  State  rejected  in  good  Calvinistic 
fashion.  Strict  ecclesiastical  disciphne  was  also  insisted 
upon  in  the  spirit  of  Calvin.  The  same  general  position 
appears  in  a  work  by  Walter  Travers,  published  in  1574, 
under  the  title  A  Full  and  Plain  Declaration  of  Ecclesiastical 
Discipline  out  of  the  Word  of  God,  and  of  the  Declining  of  the 
Church  of  England  from  the  same.^ 

The  classical  defence  of  the  established  Anglican  position 
against  the  attacks  of  the  Puritans  is  found  in  Richard 
Hooker's  great  work  on  Ecclesiastical  Polity.^  In  opposi- 
tion to  the  Puritan  insistence  upon  the  Scriptures  as  the 
sole  rule  of  conduct,  Hooker  maintains  that  the  Bible, 
the  tradition  of  the  Church,  and  the  human  reason  all  have 
their  places  in  determining  what  is  right,  both  for  the 
individual  and  for  the  Church.  *  For  whereas  God  hath 
left  sundry  kinds  of  laws  unto  men,  and  by  all  those  laws 

1  This  became  the  recognised  text-book  of  puritanism.  It  was  written  in 
Latin  and  issued  by  Cartwright  in  an  English  translation.  In  the  same 
connection  may  be  mentioned  a  brief  book  of  discipline  drawn  up  about  1580 
on  the  basis  of  Travers'  work  and  widely  used  by  Puritan  clergymen  in 
the  effort  to  reform  the  English  Church  from  within,  and  to  make  it  Presby- 
terian in  government  and  discipline.  An  English  translation  of  it  was  found 
among  Cartwright's  papers  and  published  in  1644  (reprinted  in  the  appendix 
of  Briggs's  ATiierican  Presbyterianism).  The  Latin  original  has  finally  come 
to  light,  and  is  given  in  ^Sigti'B  Introduction  to  the  Fifth  Book  of  Hooker's 
Ecdesiastical  Polity  (1899). 

2  The  first  four  books  were  published  in  1594,  the  fifth  and  longest  in  1597, 
the  sixth,  seventh,  and  eighth  after  the  author's  death,  from  notes  found 
among  his  papers.  The  sixth  book,  as  it  stands,  has  no  relation  to  the 
Puritan  controversy,  in  spite  of  its  title,  end  should  not  constitute  a  part  of 
the  Ecclesiastical  Polity. 


Til.]  THE  ENGLISH  REFORMATION  12'J 

the  actions  of  men  are  in  some  sort  directed ;  they  hold 
that  one  only  law,  the  Scripture,  must  be  the  rule  to 
direct  in  all  things,  even  so  far  as  to  the  taking  up  of  a  rush 
or  straw,  about  which  point  there  should  not  need  any 
question  to  grow,  and  that  which  is  grown  might  presently 
end,  if  they  did  but  yield  to  these  two  restraints.  The 
first  is,  not  to  extend  the  actions  whereof  they  speak  so 
low  as  that  instance  doth  import  of  taking  up  a  straw, 
but  rather  keep  themselves  at  the  least  within  the  compass 
of  moral  actions,  actions  which  have  in  them  vice  or 
virtue.  The  second,  not  to  exact  at  our  hands  for  every 
action  the  knowledge  of  some  place  of  Scripture  out  of 
which  we  stand  bound  to  deduce  it,  as  by  divers  testi- 
monies they  seek  to  enforce ;  but  rather  as  the  truth 
is,  so  to  acknowledge,  that  it  sufiiceth  if  such  action 
be  framed  according  to  the  law  of  reason '  (Book  n., 
Introduction). 

In  matters  of  faith.  Hooker  held  that  the  Bible  alone 
should  be  followed,  but  in  the  sphere  of  polity  and  worship 
the  Church  might  adopt  such  forms  as  she  pleased,  and 
might  change  them  when  she  saw  fit,  provided  she  did 
not  contradict  the  principles  of  religion  laid  down  in 
Scripture.* 

In  discussing  the  details  of  the  Anglican  system  which 
were  criticised  by  the  Puritans,  Hooker  maintained  that 
the  question  in  every  case  is  not  whether  the  particular 
forms  and  ceremonies  are  of  Popish  origin,  but  whether 
they  are  bad  in  themselves.  Even  if  they  cannot  be  shown 
to  be  positively  good  and  useful,  if  they  are  not  injurious, 
they  should  be  retained.  Moreover,  even  harmful  things 
should  be  kept  if  not  too  harmful,  for  the  evil  of  changing 
the  established  order  may  prove  greater  than  the  evil 
involved  in  retaining  the  thing  complained  of.^ 

The  seventh  book  contains  an  elaborate  defence  of 

1  Cf.  bk.  ni.  chaps,  ill.  and  x. ;  and  bk.  v.  chap.  Tiii. 
*  Bk.  IT.  chap.  xir. 


128  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

episcopacy  on  the  basis  of  the  Bible  and  the  tradition  of 
the  Church.  In  the  first  chapter  it  is  said,  '  A  thousand 
five  hundred  years  and  upward  the  church  of  Christ  hath 
now  continued  under  the  sacred  regiment  of  bishops. 
Neither  for  so  long  hath  Christianity  been  ever  planted 
in  any  kingdom  throughout  the  world,  but  with  this  kind 
of  government  alone  ;  which  to  have  been  ordained  of 
God,  I  am  for  mine  own  part  even  as  resolutely  persuaded 
as  that  any  other  kind  of  government  in  the  world  what- 
soever is  of  God.'  But  the  book  must  be  read  in  the  light 
of  Hooker's  general  position  touching  the  authority  of 
the  Church  to  fix  and  to  alter  its  government  and  worship, 
and  particularly  in  the  light  of  such  a  passage  as  the  follow- 
ing from  the  third  book  :  '  If  therefore  we  did  seek  to 
maintain  that  which  most  advantageth  our  own  cause, 
the  very  best  way  for  us  and  the  strongest  against  them 
were  to  hold  even  as  they  do  that  in  Scripture  there  must 
needs  be  found  some  particular  form  of  Church  polity 
which  God  hath  instituted,  and  which  for  that  very  cause 
belongeth  to  all  churches,  to  all  times.  But  with  any  such 
partial  eye  to  respect  ourselves,  and  by  cunning  to  make 
those  things  seem  the  truest  which  are  the  fittest  to  serve 
our  purpose,  is  a  thing  which  we  neither  like  nor  mean  to 
follow '  (chap.  X.). 

The  eighth  book  is  a  defence  of  the  royal  supremacy  on 
the  ground  that  the  Church  of  England  is  a  national 
institution  to  which  every  Englishman  belongs,  and  there- 
fore is  subject  to  the  same  authorities  which  the  nation 
as  a  whole  is  subject  to.  The  work  constitutes  an  ad- 
mirable presentation  of  the  Anglican  point  of  view,  and 
rises  far  above  the  level  of  contemporary  controversy  in 
loftiness  of  style,  breadth  of  outlook,  kindliness  of  temper, 
general  moderation  and  avoidance  of  all  extremes.  In  its 
emphasis  on  the  dignity  of  human  reason,  in  its  insistence 
on  the  authority  of  tradition,  and  in  its  recognition  of  the 
value  of  rites  and  ceremonies,  and  of  the  importance  of 


vu.]  THE  ENGLISH  REFORMATION  129 

uniformity  of  worship  and  order  and  propriety  in  the 
services,  it  is  representative  in  the  highest  degree  of  the 
best  type  of  historic  Anghcanism. 

The  Presbyterian  principles  of  Cartwright  were  not 
shared  by  all  the  Puritans,  but  tliey  became  increasingly 
common,  and  as  time  passed  the  controversy  was  more 
and  more  confined  to  questions  of  polity  and  discipline. 
Doctrine,  too,  became  involved  as  the  Puritans,  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  growing  Arminianism  of  their  opponents, 
emphasised  a  high  and  rigid  Calvinism.  When  they  gained 
control  of  the  government  under  the  Commonwealth,  they 
immediately  undertook  to  put  their  principles  into  practice 
and  to  reform  the  Church  in  accordance  with  their  long- 
cherished  ideas.  The  Westminster  standards  (1645  ff.) 
were  for  a  short  time  the  official  standards  of  the  English 
Church.  They  represented  an  extreme  Calvinism  in 
theology,  Presbyterianism  in  polity  (though  without  the 
assertion  of  its  exclusive  divine  right),  and  Puritanism  in 
worship.  With  the  Restoration  in  1660  the  old  Anglican 
order  was  re-established,  and  Puritanism  was  again  pro- 
scribed, and  since  the  Revolution  of  1688  it  has  existed 
only  in  the  form  of  legalised  dissent. 

In  Scotland,  meanwhile,  under  the  leadership  of  John 
Knox,  Calvinism  in  doctrine,  Presbyterianism  in  polity, 
and  Puritanism  in  worship  were  permanently  stamped 
upon  the  Protestantism  of  the  country, ^  and  in  1690,  after 
the  English  revolution,  the  Westminster  standards  were 
made  binding  by  law  upon  the  Scottish  Church. 

As  already  seen,  the  great  Puritan  leaders  of  the  late 
sixteenth  and  early  seventeenth  centuries  desired  to 
reform  the  English  Church  from  within.  They  had  no 
quarrel  with  the  idea  of  a  national  church,  though  they 
would  make  it  independent  of  State  control.     But  there 

1  See  the  first  Scottish  Confession  of  1P60,  the  First  Book  of  Discipline  of 
the  same  year,  and  the  Genevan  Book  of  Common  Order  of  1556,  which  was 
nsed  also  in  Scotland. 


130  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch, 

were  others  who  repudiated  the  idea  altogether,  and  with- 
drew from  the  estabhshment  and  undertook  to  form 
independent  churches  of  their  own.  The  most  important 
of  these  were  the  early  Independents  or  Congregationahsts, 
whose  principles  were  first  set  forth  by  Robert  Browne  in 
a  number  of  remarkable  tracts.^ 

Browne's  theory  of  the  Church  was  that  of  the  Conti- 
nental Anabaptists.  The  Church  is  a  community  of 
saints  constituted  by  a  voluntary  covenant  taken  by 
Christian  believers  with  God  and  with  each  other.  It  must 
keep  itself  free  from  all  outside  control,  must  be  indepen- 
dent of  the  State,  and  must  be  preserved  from  impurity 
by  the  exercise  of  the  strictest  discipline.  Browne  was 
apparently  moved  originally  by  the  desire,  not  to  frame  a 
novel  ecclesiastical  polity,  but  to  promote  the  spiritual 
Afe  of  believers.  To  this  end  it  seemed  to  him  necessary 
that  they  should  separate  from  their  ungodly  fellow- 
members  of  the  Established  Church,  and  should  have 
communion  and  worship  only  with  the  truly  regenerate. 
It  was  impossible,  he  believed,  to  make  the  Church  of 
England  a  really  spiritual  institution,  including  as  it  did 
all  baptized  persons,  and  the  course  of  his  fellow-Puritans 
in  looking  for  its  reformation  to  the  civil  government, 
and  waiting  until  their  principles  found  acceptance  in 
Parliament,  seemed  to  him  futile.  He  adopted  the  Ana- 
baptist principle  of  the  complete  separation  of  Church 
and  State,  and  advocated  the  Reformation  of  the  Church 
'  without  tarrying  for  any,'  to  quote  from  the  title  of  one 
of  his  most  famous  tracts  ;  or  in  other  words,  the  formation 
of  a  new  church,  or  new  churches,  composed  wholly  of 

1  The  most  important  of  his  tracts  are  *  A  Book  which  Showeth  the  Life 
and  Manners  of  all  True  Christians'  (1582),  'A  Treatise  of  Reformation 
Without  Tarvying  for  Any'  (1582),  'A  Txeitise  upon  the  Twenty-third  of 
Matthew'  (1582),  and  'A  true  and  Short  I>>?claration  both  of  the  gathering 
and  joining  together  of  certain  Persons,  and  also  of  the  Lamentable  Breach 
and  Division  which  fell  among  Them'  (1583?)  On  Browne  see  especially 
Dexter's  Congregafioncdism  of  the  Last  Three  Hundred  Years  as  seen  in  its 
Literature,  and  Burrage's  The  True  Story  of  Robert  Browne  (Oxford,  1906). 


vrii.]  THE  ENGLISH  EEFOEMATION  131 

true  believers,  and  patterned  in  all  matters  strictly  after 
the  word  of  God. 

Browne's  position  touching  the  relation  of  Church  and 
State  is  set  forth  in  such  passages  as  the  following  : — '  My 
kingdom,  saith  Christ,  is  not  of  this  world,  and  they  would 
shift  in  both  bishops  and  magistrates  into  his  spiritual 
throne  to  make  it  of  this  world  ;  yea  to  stay  the  church 
government  on  them,  is  not  only  to  shift  but  to  thrust 
them  before  Christ.  Yet  under  him  in  his  spiritual 
kingdom  are  (1  Cor.  xii.)  first  Apostles ;  secondly  Pro- 
phets ;  thirdly  teachers,  etc.  Also  helpers  and  spiritual 
guides  :  But  they  put  the  magistrates  first,  which  in 
a  commonwealth  indeed  are  first,  and  above  the  preachers, 
yet  have  they  no  ecclesiastical  authority  at  all,  but 
only  as  any  other  Christians,  if  so  be  they  be  Christians.'  ^ 
'  We  know  that  Moses  might  reform,  and  the  judges  and 
kings  which  followed  him,  and  so  may  our  Magistrates  : 
yea  they  may  reform  the  Church  and  command  things 
expedient  for  the  same.  Yet  may  they  do  nothing  con- 
cerning the  Church,  but  only  civilly,  and  as  civil  Magis- 
trates, that  is,  they  have  not  that  authority  over  the 
Church,  as  to  be  Prophets  or  Priests,  or  spiritual  Kings, 
as  they  are  Magistrates  over  the  same  :  but  only  to  rule 
the  commonwealth  in  all  outward  justice,  to  maintain  the 
right  welfare  and  honour  thereof,  with  outward  power, 
bodily  punishment,  and  civil  forcing  of  men.  And 
therefore  also  because  the  Church  is  in  a  commonwealth 
it  is  of  their  charge  :  that  is  concerning  the  outward 
provision  and  outward  justice,  they  are  to  look  to  it,  but 
to  compel  religion,  to  plant  churches  by  power,  and  to 
force  a  submission  to  ecclesiastical  government  by  laws  and 
penalties  belongeth  not  to  them,  as  is  proved  before, 
neither  yet  to  the  Church.'  ^ 

1  *  Reformation  without  Tarrying  for  Any ' ;  reprint  in  '  Old  South  Leaflet,* 
No.  100,  p.  4. 

2  Ih'.d.  p.  13.      Browne's  attitude  in  this  matter  seems  clear,  but  in  hia 
article  on  '  Brownism '  in  Hastings's  Encydojpoedia  o^  Religion  and  Ethics, 


132  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOKE  KANT  [ch. 

In  Browne's  theory  of  the  Church  the  primitive  idea 
of  it  as  a  community  called  out  of,  and  set  apart  from,  the 
world,  came  to  extremest  expression.  Nowhere  else  in 
history  has  it  been  more  consciously  held  and  consistently 
realised.  The  Church  is  a  company  of  saints,  and  its 
purpose  is  not  the  salvation  of  the  world,  or  the  transforma- 
tion of  the  world  into  the  Kingdom  of  God,  but  the 
communion  of  its  members  with  God  and  with  each  other, 
and  their  growth  in  grace.  The  Church  exists  primarily 
for  common  worship  and  mutual  edification.     Not  even 

Powicke  says,  referring  to  Browne :  '  But  on  the  Continent  he  had  been  more 
than  anticipated  by  the  Anabaptists  ;  for,  in  one  respect  at  least,  his  plea,  as 
compared  with  theirs,  presents  a  remarkable  limitation,  viz.  that  he  seems  to 
permit,  if  not  to  oblige  the  Prince — after  the  examples  of  "the  good  kings  of 
Juda" — not  indeed  to  "force  the  people  by  laws  or  by  power  to  receive  the 
(true)  church  government,"  but  yet,  when  once  they  had  received  it,  to  keep 
them  to  it,  and  even  to  "put  them  to  death"  if  "then  they  fell  away.'" 
The  whole  passage  from  which  Powicke  quotes  runs  as  follows  : — 'The  Lord's 
kingdom  is  not  by  force,  neither  by  an  army  or  strength  (Zach.  iv.,Hosea  ii.), 
as  be  the  kingdoms  of  this  world.  Neither  durst  Moses  nor  any  of  the  good 
kings  of  Juda  force  the  people  by  law  or  by  power  to  receive  the  church 
government,  but  after  they  received  it,  if  then  they  fell  away,  and  sought  not 
the  Lord,  they  might  put  them  to  death.  For  the  covenant  was  first  made, 
as  it  is  written  (2  Chron.  xv.),  they  made  a  covenant  to  seek  the  Lord  God  of 
their  fathers,  with  all  their  heart,  and  with  all  tlieir  soul.  And  then  follow 
the  next  words  which  are  to  be  understood  of  them  which  made  the  covenant, 
for  of  them  which  so  sware  unto  the  Lord,  whosoever  did  not  seek  the  Lord 
God  of  Israel,  should  be  slain,  whether  he  were  small  or  great,  man  or 
woman.  And  therefore  did  the  whole  congregation  of  Israel  gather  them 
together,  to  war  against  the  children  of  Reuben  and  Gad,  because  they 
seemed  to  forsake  the  covenant  (Joshua  xxii.).  Yet  would  not  Hezekiah 
fight  against  Israel,  though  they  laughed  him  to  scorn  and  mocked  at  his 
doings  (2  Chron.  xxx.),  for  they  had  not  received  the  covenant,  but  their 
forefathers,  and  they  were  now  called  to  the  covenant  again,  which  the 
Lord  had  disannulled  with  their  forefathers  ;  as  it  is  written  (2  Chron.  xv.), 
that  for  a  long  season  Israel  had  been  without  the  true  God,  and  without 
priest  to  teach,  and  without  law  '  (p.  10  flF.). 

Moses'  action  was  evidently  justified  according  to  Browne,  not  because, 
in  general,  magistrates  have  power  to  compel  religious  conformity,  but 
because  the  people  in  this  case  had  taken  a  covenant  and  he  had  the  right  to 
require  fulfilment  of  it,  the  breaking  of  the  covenant  being  properly  a  crime 
cognisable  by  the  authorities.  Moreover,  Browne  claimed  that  the  Jewish 
commonwealth  could  not  be  made  u  model  for  En  gin  nd  in  the  matter  of  a 
connection  between  Church  and  State.  '  But  if  Zachariah  or  Haggai  had 
tarried,  it  proveth  not  that  we  must  tarry  for  our  magistrates.  For  both 
Jehoshua  the  high  priest,  and  Zerubbabel  the  Prince,  were  figures  of  the  high 
priesthood  and  princedom  of  Christ,  and  also  had  an  ecclesiastical  goverD* 
meat  over  the  church  which  our  magistrates  have  not '  (p.  13). 


VII.]  THE  ENGLISH  REFOEMATION  133 

monasticism  was  in  principle  less  regardful  of  the  welfare 
of  the  world  at  large  than  those  who  held  this  theory. 
In  it  the  old  Jewish  idea  of  election  as  a  privilege  rather 
than  a  responsibility  found  its  most  consistent  utterance, 
and  religious  exclusiveness  of  an  extreme  type  was  the 
result.  It  is  true  that  Browne  and  the  early  Congregation- 
alists,  like  the  Anabaptists  in  general,  did  not  deny  the 
salvation  of  men  outside  of  their  particular  communions ; 
indeed,  church  membership  w^as  not  necessary  to  salvation 
except  as  it  was  a  part  of  the  Christian's  duty  which  he 
could  not  with  impunity  neglect.  But  only  such  pure 
communities  as  they  were  standing  for  could  be  regarded 
as  genuine  churches,  and  hence  the  obligation  of  every 
true  Christian  w^as  to  connect  himself  with  one  of  them. 
The  consequence  was  an  exclusiveness  in  effect  as  com- 
plete as  if  they  had  denied  salvation  to  any  but  themselves. 
Consistently  with  this  theory  of  the  Church,  Browne 
followed  the  Anabaptists  in  insisting  upon  strict  discipline. 
Here  he  was  at  one  with  Calvin  and  the  Puritans  in  general. 
One  of  the  chief  criticisms  passed  upon  the  English  estab- 
lishment by  the  Puritans  was  its  neglect  of  discipline,  and 
the  consequent  presence  wdthin  it  of  a  multitude  of  un- 
worthy members.  But  Browne  went  even  further  than 
they,  and  insisted  on  excluding  many  whom  they  w^ould 
have  allowed  to  remain  within  the  Church ;  and  the  differ- 
ence was  not  merely  one  of  degree,  but  of  underlying  theory. 
If  the  Church  be  a  State  institution,  and  all  baptized 
citizens  belong  to  it,  as  Browne's  Puritan  contemporaries 
commonly  agreed,  then  the  test  to  be  applied  to  church 
members  is  of  a  different  kind  from  Browne's  test.  Open 
and  flagrant  immorality,  scandalous  living  of  any  kind, 
might  fairly  lead  to  excommunication,  but  more  than  this 
could  hardly  be  demanded.  But  where  the  Church  is 
supposed  to  be  composed  only  of  the  truly  regenerate, 
any  valid  evidence  of  the  lack  of  a  new  birth  must 
in  consistency  mean  exclusion  from  membership.     There 


134  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

might  be  differences  of  opinion  as  to  the  way  in  which  this 
principle  should  be  applied  in  particular  cases,  as  there 
actually  were,  both  among  the  Anabaptists  and  the  early 
Independents,  but  the  principle  itself  is  clear  enough,  and 
differs  radically  from  the  common  Puritan  and  Anglican 
position. 

Another  Anabaptist  tenet  adopted  by  Browne,  and  made 
one  of  the  fundamental  planks  of  Congregationalism,  was 
the  independence  of  the  local  church.  According  to 
Browne,  '  Christians  are  a  company  ob  number  of  believers 
who,  by  a  willing  covenant,  made  with  their  God,  are  under 
the  government  of  God  and  Christ,  and  keep  his  laws  in 
one  holy  communion.'  And  throughout  his  Book  which 
Showeth  the  Life  and  Manners  of  all  true  Christians,  from 
which  this  quotation  is  taken,  the  independence  and 
autonomy  of  the  local  church  are  assumed.  Indeed,  on 
Browne's  theory  of  the  Church  as  constituted  by  a  volun- 
tary covenant  taken  by  Christian  men  with  God  and  with 
each  other,  anything  else  than  independency  was  im- 
possible. According  to  this  theory,  the  Church  can  be 
nothing  but  a  local  company  of  Christians,  who  enter  into 
covenant  and  carry  on  their  Christian  life  and  work  to- 
gether. It  is  not  the  only  church ;  wherever  the  truly 
regenerate  thus  enter  into  covenant,  there  is  a  true  church, 
and  hence  there  are  many  churches  of  Christ,  each  pos- 
sessed of  all  the  rights  and  privileges  and  powers  of  such  an 
institution. 

Still  another  feature  of  Anabaptism  which  was  taken 
over  and  made  their  own  by  Bro^Tie  and  the  early  Inde- 
pendents was  the  democratic  organisation  of  the  Cliurch. 
Ecclesiastical  officers  are  not  self-appointed  nor  imposed 
upon  the  Church  from  without,  but  are  chosen  by  the 
congregation  itself,  and  are  responsible  to  their  brethren, 
and  may  at  any  time  be  deposed  by  them.  They  do  not 
constitute  a  special  clerical  class  possessed  of  inalienable 
rights  and  independent  of  the  people. 


ni.]  THE  ENGLISH  EEFOEMATION  135 

In  even  sharper  contrast  with  traditional  theory  was  the 
principle  that  the  ordination  as  well  as  the  appointment 
of  its  pastors,  teachers,  and  other  officers  lay  in  the  hands 
of  the  congregation.  Ordination  is  not  a  sacrament,  and 
does  not  convey  grace,  nor  does  it  create  a  special  minis- 
terial class.  It  is  simply  the  recognition  of  a  man's  divine 
gift  to  teach  or  rule,  and  of  his  choice  by  the  congregation 
to  exercise  that  gift  within  its  bounds.  In  this  the  Reforma- 
tion principle  of  the  priesthood  of  all  believers,  and  of 
their  direct  access  to  God  in  Christ  without  any  human 
intermediary,  found  clear  and  consistent  exhibition,  as  it 
did  not  in  the  churches  of  Luther,  Calvin,  and  the  other 
great  Reformers. 

In  all  the  matters  referred  to,  Browne  and  his  early 
followers  agreed  with  the  Anabaptists,  whose  principles 
they  had  largely  adopted.  But  there  was  one  important 
difference.  According  to  the  Anabaptists,  infant  baptism 
is  no  baptism ;  only  true  believers  are  to  be  baptized, 
and  their  baptism  constitutes  the  pledge  of  their  Christian 
discipleship  and  their  covenant  with  God,  which  makes 
them  members  of  His  Church.  Browne,  on  the  other 
hand,  retained  infant  baptism.  In  his  Book  which  Showeth 
the  Life  and  Manners  of  all  true  Christians,  apparently 
with  the  Anabaptist  position  distinctly  in  mind,  he  says : 
*The  children  of  the  faithful,  though  they  be  infants, 
are  to  be  offered  to  God  and  to  the  church  that  they  may 
be  baptized.  Also  those  infants  or  children  which  are 
of  the  household  of  the  faithful  and  under  their  full  power.' 
The  ceremony  evidently  meant  primarily  that  believers 
took  a  pledge  to  bring  up  all  those  dependent  on  them 
in  the  admonition  of  the  Lord.  It  thus  lost  all  sacra- 
mental character,  and  its  retention  was  not  inconsistent 
either  with  fundamental  Protestant  principles  or  with 
Browne's  own  theory  of  the  Church.  But  the  continu- 
ance of  the  practice  made  it  necessary  to  lay  greater  stresa 
than  the  Anabaptists  did  upon  the  covenant  whereby 


136  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

believers  bound  themselves  together  in  a  church.  They 
did  not  become  church  members  by  baptism,  as  the  Ana- 
baptists held,  they  were  baptized  long  before  they  believed, 
and  the  Church  was  composed  only  of  believers.  A 
further  and  independent  step  was,  therefore,  necessary 
to  make  them  its  members.  Unless  baptized  believers 
entered  into  voluntary  covenant  with  each  other  and  with 
God — a  covenant  not  involved  in  baptism,  and  entirely 
detached  from  it — there  was  no  church,  though  there 
might  be  true  believers.  Thus  the  covenant  idea  became 
more  controlhng  than  in  Anabaptism,  and  may  be  regarded 
as  the  most  distinctive  element  in  the  Congregational 
theory  of  the  Church.  By  it  the  Church  is  made  more 
emphatically  than  ever  before  a  company  of  men  volun- 
tarily bound  to  one  another  as  well  as  to  God.  This 
separation  of  baptism  from  the  covenant  brought  out  with 
greater  clearness  than  ever  the  fundamental  difference 
between  the  traditional  doctrine  of  the  Church,  both 
Catholic  and  Protestant,  and  the  theory  of  the  Separatists. 
To  the  former  the  Church  is  first,  and  the  behever  second ; 
only  in  the  Church  is  salvation  to  be  found.  To  the 
latter,  on  the  contrary,  and  even  more  clearly  and  emphati- 
cally to  Browne  than  to  the  Anabaptists  that  preceded  him, 
the  believer  is  first,  and  the  Church  second,  for  the  Church 
is  nothing  else  than  a  community  or  assembly  of  those 
already  saints. 

The  retention  of  infant  baptism  by  Browne  was  pro- 
ductive of  much  confusion  among  his  followers.  It  led 
almost  inevitably  to  the  notion  that  baptized  infants  are 
in  some  sense  members  of  the  Church,  a  notion  quite  in- 
consistent with  his  fundamental  theory.  As  a  consequence, 
some  of  his  followers,  feeling  the  difficulty,  follow^ed  the 
Anabaptists  in  rejecting  infant  baptism,  and  united  to 
form  a  separate  organisation,  which  became  the  parent 
church  of  English  Baptists.  Among  them  the  congre- 
gational principle  of  the  strictly  voluntary  character  of 


▼II.]  THE  ENGLISH  KEFORMATION  137 

the  Church  has  been  kept  aUve  more  generally  than  among 
those  who  bear  the  name  of  Congregationalists. 

At  another  important  point  many  of  Bro\\Tie's  early 
followers  differed  both  with  him  and  with  the  Anabaptists. 
Instead  of  insisting  upon  the  complete  separation  of 
Church  and  State,  they  approved  a  certain  degree  of 
connection  between  them.  In  the  London- Amsterdam 
Confession  of  1596,  it  is  said  '  That  it  is  the  office  and  duty 
of  princes  and  magistrates,  who,  by  the  ordinance  of  God, 
are  supreme  governors  under  him  over  all  persons  and 
causes  within  their  realms  and  dominions,  to  suppress  and 
root  out  by  their  authority  all  false  ministries,  voluntary 
religions  and  counterfeit  worship  of  God.  .  .  .  And  on 
the  other  hand  to  establish  and  maintain  by  their  laws 
every  part  of  God's  word,  his  pure  religion  and  true 
ministry,  to  cherish  and  protect  all  such  as  are  careful  to 
worship  God  according  to  his  word,  and  to  lead  a  godly 
life  in  all  peace  and  loyalty  ;  yea  to  enforce  all  their 
subjects,  whether  ecclesiastical  or  civil,  to  do  their  duties 
to  God  and  men,  protecting  and  maintaining  the  good, 
punishing  and  restraining  the  evil,  according  as  God  hath 
commanded,  whose  lieutenants  they  are  here  on  earth.'  ^ 

Under  the  Commonwealth  the  Independents  advocated 
a  degree  of  religious  liberty  far  greater  than  most  believed 
in,  but  by  no  means  complete,  as  the  following  passage 
from  the  famous  Savoy  declaration  of  1658  abundantly 
shows  : — '  Although  the  magistrate  is  bound  to  encourage, 
promote,  and  protect  the  professor  and  profession  of  the 
gospel,  and  to  manage  and  order  civil  administrations  in 
a  due  subserviency  to  the  interest  of  Christ  in  the  world, 
and  to  that  end  to  take  care  that  men  of  corrupt  minds 
and  conversations  do  not  licentiously  publish  and  divulge 
blasphemy  and  errors  in  their  own  nature,  subverting 
the  faith,  and  inevitably  destroying  the  souls  of  them  that 

1  §  39  ;  quoted  from  Walker's  Creeds  and  Platforms  of  Congregationalism, 
p.  117. 


138  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ce, 

receive  them  ;  yet  in  such  differences  about  the  doctrines 
of  the  gospel,  or  ways  of  the  worship  of  God,  as  may  befall 
men  exercising  a  good  conscience,  manifesting  it  in  their 
conversation,  and  holding  the  foundation,  not  disturbing 
others  in  their  ways  or  worship  that  differ  from  them  ; 
there  is  no  warrant  for  the  magistrate  under  the  gospel 
to  abridge  them  of  their  liberty.'  ^  In  New  England  even 
so  large  a  measure  of  liberty  as  this  was  not  granted  in  the 
early  days  to  those  who  were  of  a  different  mind  from  the 
authorities  in  religious  matters.  Evidently  the  difference 
between  these  Independents  on  the  one  side,  and  Calvin 
and  the  Puritans  in  general  on  the  other,  was  at  this  point 
simply  a  matter  of  degree.  All  believed  in  some  connection 
between  Church  and  State,  but  the  Independents  reduced 
it  to  lower  terms  than  Calvin  and  most  of  the  Puritans. 
In  recognising  the  possibility  of  any  connection  whatever 
they  were  quite  untrue  to  the  underlying  principle  upon 
which  their  theory  of  the  Church  rested,  and  their  in- 
consistency did  much  to  obscure  and  hinder  its  influence, 
opening  the  way  to  the  dominance  of  another  and  totally 
different  theory  of  the  Church. 

On  the  other  hand,  many  of  the  early  English  Baptists, 
apparently  under  the  influence  of  the  Anabaptists  of 
Holland,  whose  theory  of  baptism  they  adopted,  were 
thoroughgoing  in  their  assertion  of  the  principle  of  religious 
liberty,  and  of  the  complete  separation  of  Church  and 
State,  showing  again  their  greater  consistency  with  the 
underlying  Congregational  theory  of  the  Church. ^ 

At  the  opposite  pole  from  the  Independents  in  their 
doctrine  of  the  Church  were  the  representatives  of  the 
High  Church  party,  which  took  its  rise  before  the  end  of 
Elizabeth's  reign,  and  was  very  strong  during  the  greater 
part  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

1  Chap.  xxiv.  §  3  ;  quoted  from  Walker,  ibid.  p.  393. 

*  See  the  'Tracts  on  Liberty  of  Conscience  and  Persecution,  1614-1661  *; 
edited  for  the  Hansard-Knollys  Society  by  E.  B.  Underbill  (London,  1846). 


VII.]  THE  ENGLISH  REFORMATION  139 

Hooker;  as  we  have  seen,  while  maintaining  that  episco- 
pacy was  the  primitive  form  of  Church  government,  did 
not  make  it  necessary  to  the  being  of  the  Church.  But  in 
opposition  to  the  narrow  Presbyterianism  of  Cartwright 
and  his  Puritan  associates,  the  tendency  arose  to  claim 
the  same  sort  of  exclusive  divine  right  for  episcopacy,  and 
thus  to  fight  fire  with  fire.  The  result  was  the  rapid 
spread  of  the  traditional  Catholic  theory  of  the  Church 
and  the  rejection  of  the  distinction  between  the  visible 
and  the  invisible  Church,  which  the  early  English  divines 
had  shared  with  the  Continental  Reformers.  In  Hammond's 
Practical  Catechism  (1644),  it  is  said  that  the  '  Church  is 
a  society  of  believers  under  bishops  and  pastors,  succeeding 
those  on  whom  the  Holy  Ghost  came  down,  and  (by 
receiving  ordination  of  those  that  had  that  power  before 
them,  that  is  of  the  bishops  of  the  church,  the  continued 
successors  of  the  Apostles)  lawfully  called  to  these  offices ' 
(p.  329). 

Perhaps  as  good  and  elaborate  a  statement  of  the  High 
Church  position  as  is  to  be  found  anywhere  is  given  by 
Herbert  Thorndike  in  his  Bights  of  the  Church  in  a  Christian 
State,  his  Laws  of  the  Church,  his  Just  Weights  and  Measures, 
and  other  works.  According  to  him  establishment  by 
the  apostles  and  control  by  the  bishops,  their  successors, 
are  necessary  to  the  very  being  of  the  true  Church,  without 
which  salvation  is  quite  impossible.  Baptism  itself  is  not 
effectual  to  salvation  unless  administered  within  the  unity 
of  this  Church.  To  suppose  that  Christians  can  join  to- 
gether to  form  a  true  church  is  preposterous;  there  can 
be  no  true  church  except  this  apostolic  episcopal  church, 
into  which  Christians  must  enter  and  within  which  they 
must  remain  if  they  would  be  saved.^ 

This  church  has  alone  the  right  to  interpret  the  word 
of  God,  for  only  to  it  have  the  apostles  entrusted  the 
deposit  of  truth,  whose  acceptance  is  necessary  to  salva- 

1  Thorndike's  Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  386  ff. 


140  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

tion.^  It  is  always  visible,  and  its  indispensable  marks, 
in  addition  to  apostolic  succession,  which  is  invariably 
necessary,  are  not  onlj^  the  word  and  the  sacraments,  but 
'  that  preaching  of  the  word  and  that  ministering  of  the 
sacraments  which  the  tradition  of  the  whole  church  con- 
firmeth  the  sense  of  the  Scriptures  to  intend.' ^ 

This,  of  course,  is  the  genuine  Catholic  theory  of  the 
Church  and  differs  from  the  Roman  Catholic  only  in  re- 
jecting the  papacy.  The  rejection  of  the  papacy  and 
separation  from  the  Church  of  Rome  were  justified  by 
Thorndike,  as  by  his  fellow-apologists  for  Anglicanism, 
by  the  departure  of  Rome  from  the  true  doctrine  of  the 
apostles  as  interpreted  by  the  universal  Church  of  the  first 
six  centuries.^  Presbyterian  and  Independent  bodies  are 
not  the  true  Church,  because  they  lack  apostolic  succes- 
sion.* The  Roman  Catholic  body,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
a  true  and  Catholic  church,  within  which  salvation  may  be 
obtained;  but  at  the  same  time  it  is  corrupt,  and  its 
abuses  are  so  great  that  salvation  is  made  difficult ,  and 
the  Church  of  England's  separation  from  it  is  therefore 
abundantly  justified.^ 

This  genuinely  Catholic  but  non-papal  theory  was 
maintained  by  many  churchmen  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
and  has  continued  ever  since  the  theory  of  the  High  Church 
party  within  the  Anglican  communion. 

1  Thomdike's  Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  110  ff. 

a  Jbid.  vol.  iv.  p.  8P5  ;  cf.  p.  905  and  vol.  v.  p.  126. 

8  Ibid,  vol  iv.  pp.  399,  436. 

*  Ihid.  vol.  V.  p.  71  ff. 

•  Ibid,  vol.  iv.  p.  910  ff. ;  roL  ▼.  p.  280  ff. 


VIII.]  pkotestai;t  schola^sticism  hi 


CHAPTER  VIII 

PROTESTANT  SCHOLASTICISM 

Upon  the  creative  period  of  the  Reformation  there  followed 
a  period  of  formulation  in  the  sphere  of  theology.  It  was 
the  common  conviction  of  Protestant  theologians  that  one 
of  the  most  important  results  of  the  Reformation,  many- 
said  its  most  important  result,  was  the  purification  of 
Christian  doctrine.  Protestantism,  it  was  claimed,  main- 
tained the  true  Catholic  faith  from  which  the  Roman 
Church  had  wandered.  To  restore  this  true  faith  and  to 
purge  it  of  all  error  was  widely  regarded  as  the  Protestant 
theologian's  supreme  duty. 

As  remarked  in  a  previous  chapter,  the  foundations  of 
Protestant  scholasticism  were  laid  by  Phihp  Melanch- 
thon.  His  idea  of  the  Church  as  a  school  for  the  teaching 
of  sound  doctrine,  his  recognition  of  reason  and  revelation 
as  the  two  sources  for  a  knowledge  of  religious  truth,  and 
his  own  labours  in  the  field  of  dogmatic  theology,  all 
contributed  to  the  rise  and  spread  of  scholasticism  within 
the  Lutheran  Church,  and  the  similar  views  and  labours 
of  his  younger  contemporary,  Calvin,  did  the  same  for  the 
Reformed  churches.  During  the  early  years  of  the  Re- 
formation there  was  too  much  work  of  a  practical  character 
to  be  done  in  spreading  evangelical  principles,  and  in 
laying  the  foundations  of  Protestantism  to  leave  much 
time  or  leisure  for  strictly  theological  work.  But  when 
the  Protestant  State  churches  of  Germany  were  once 
firmly  established,   and   the  Reformation  had  gained  a 


142  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

permanent  footing  in  Switzerland,  the  labour  of  systematis- 
ing  Protestant  theology  was  taken  up  by  many  hands. 
The  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth  century  and  the  major 
part  of  the  seventeenth  constituted  the  great  theological 
period  of  Protestantism  upon  the  Continent,  both  Lutheran 
and  Reformed — the  period  of  Protestant  scholasticism  in 
a  pre-eminent  degree. 

The  theological  conception  of  the  new  movement  led 
naturally  to  serious  and  long-continued  controversy.  If 
the  great  purpose  of  the  Reformation  was  to  restore  sound 
doctrine,  it  became  of  cardinal  importance  to  discover 
and  conserve  such  doctrine  in  all  its  parts.  To  allow  error 
to  prevail  was  to  defeat  the  end  for  which  Protestantism 
existed.  Already  before  the  death  of  Luther  diver- 
gencies had  appeared  between  his  own  and  Melanchthon's 
interpretations  of  certain  elements  of  the  traditional 
faith.  The  seeds  of  controversy  were  thus  sot\ti  at  an 
early  day,  and  while  the  disagreements  were  often  from  a 
practical  point  of  view  of  little  consequence,  they  had 
large  theological  implications,  and  it  was  impossible  under 
the  circumstances  to  overlook  them.  Into  the  details 
of  the  numerous  controversies  which  distracted  both 
wings  of  Protestantism  it  is  out  of  the  question  to  enter 
here.  The  Lutheran  churches  suffered  from  them  more 
than  the  Reformed.  The  theology  of  the  latter  was  based 
upon  one  great  controlling  principle  to  a  degree  not  true 
of  the  former.  Luther's  conception  of  saving  faith  had 
tremendous  practical  value,  both  religious  and  ethical, 
but  as  an  effective  principle  of  organisation  in  dogmatic 
theology  it  did  not  compare  with  Calvin's  conception 
of  the  omnipotent  will  of  God.  It  was  widely  interpreted 
indeed  to  mean  the  acceptance  of  sound  doctrine,  and  thus 
had  only  preliminary  and  formal  value  for  theology. 
Moreover,  the  Reformed  churches  had,  in  Calvin's  Institutes, 
a  system  of  dogmatics  unmatched  in  the  other  camp, 
and  in  Calvin  himself  a  leader  who  divided  his  authority 


VIII.]  PEOTESTANT  SCHOLASTICISM  143 

with  no  other,  while  Lutheran  theologians  looked  back  to 
two  leaders  of  diverse  tendencies. 

Melanchthon's  disagreements  with  Luther,  and  particu- 
larly his  conduct  in  connection  with  the  Leipzig  Interim 
of  1548,  when  he  yielded  to  the  Catholics  far  more  than 
most  Lutherans  thought  justifiable,  brought  widespread 
hatred  upon  him,  and  two  parties  speedily  arose — the 
Philippists,  as  Melanchthon's  supporters  were  called,  and 
the  Genuine  Lutherans,  as  his  opponents  styled  themselves. 
Between  these  parties  bitter  enmity  reigned  for  some  years, 
and  its  effects  were  felt  for  a  much  longer  time.  The  most 
important  controversies  in  which  the  two  parties  aligned 
themselves  upon  opposite  sides  were  the  Synergistic, 
Melanchthon's  synergism  being  set  over  against  Luther's 
doctrine  of  the  bondage  of  the  will  and  unconditional 
predestination ;  and  the  Crypto-Calvinistic,  in  which  the 
subject  of  dispute  was  the  nature  of  Christ's  presence  in 
the  Lord's  Supper,  the  followers  of  Melanchthon  being 
accused  by  their  opponents  of  secretly  maintaining  Calvin's 
doctrine  of  the  eucharist.  Other  controversies  were  the 
Antinomian,  concerning  the  place  of  the  law ;  the  Major- 
istic,  concerning  the  relation  of  good  works  to  salvation ; 
and  the  Osiandrian,  concerning  the  nature  of  justification. ^ 
In  these  and  other  less  important  controversies  the  align- 
ment of  parties  was  not  always  identical. 

More  than  one  German  prince,  and  not  a  few  theologians, 
deprecated  the  constant  theological  strife  and  the  resulting 
divisions,   and  many  efforts  were  made  to  bring  about 

1  Of  all  these  controversies  the  Osiandrian  is  the  most  interesting. 
Osiandfr,  one  of  the  greatest  Lutheran  preachers  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
and  at  the  time  of  his  death  Professor  of  Theology  at  Konigsberg,  reproduced 
the  genuine  Pauline  position  tliat  the  sinner  is  made  righteous  (not  merely 
declared  s"^),  and  that  instantaneously,  by  the  indwelling  of  Christ,  who 
becomes  Himself  the  sinner's  righteousness.  See  his  Disputaiiones  duce: 
una  de  lege  et  evangelio  (1549) ;  Altera  de  justificafione  (1550) ;  his  De  unico 
mediatm-e  Christo  et  justificationefidei  (1551)";  and  see  M'Giffert's  ^jjostoZic 
Age,  chap,  iii.,  for  this  interpretation  of  Paul. 

The  position  of  Osiander  found  little  favour.  Its  Pauline  character  was 
not  recosnised  then,  and  has  seldom  been  recognised  since,  and  Osiander's 
realsiguiiicance  has  consequently  been  generally  overlooked. 


144  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

reconciliation  and  reunion.  Finally,  in  1580,  there  was 
published  by  the  Elector  of  Saxony  the  famous  Formula 
of  Concord,  a  confession  of  faith  drawn  up  by  representatives 
of  the  Lutheran  party,  which  had  succeeded  in  gaining  the 
upper  hand  in  Saxony  as  well  as  in  the  greater  part  of 
Germany.  The  formula  did  not  attempt  to  reconcile  the 
Philippists  and  the  Genuine  Lutherans,  but  only  divergent 
views  within  the  ranks  of  the  latter  party.  In  this  aim 
it  was  eminently  successful.  Its  statements  were  moder- 
ate, and  represented,  in  some  cases,  a  compromise,  not 
always  consistent,  between  two  divergent  opinions.  It 
did  not  deal  with  the  whole  range  of  theology,  but  only 
with  such  subjects  as  the  following,  all  of  which  had  been 
matter  of  controversy : — original  sin,  free  will,  the  righteous- 
ness of  faith,  good  works,  the  law  and  the  gospel,  the  Lord's 
Supper,  the  person  of  Christ,  His  descent  into  hell,  adia- 
phora  or  indifferent  things,  and  predestination.  It  asserted 
the  supreme  authority  of  the  Bible,  and  the  authority  in 
a  secondary  sense,  as  containing  the  proper  interpretation 
of  the  Scriptures,  of  the  three  ancient  creeds  (the  Apostles', 
the  Nicene,  and  the  Athanasian),  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
Melanchthon's  Apology  for  the  Confession,  the  Smalcald 
Articles,  and  Luther's  two  Catechisms.  These,  with  the 
Formula  of  Concord  itself,  were  published  together  under 
the  title  of  The  Booh  of  Concord}  which  was  widely  adopted 
as  the  official  doctrinal  standard  of  the  Lutheran  churches. 
The  Formida  of  Concord  served  to  compact  the  conservative 
wing  of  Lutheranism,  and  to  stereotype  its  theology. 
Thenceforth  the  lines  were  fixed  within  which  orthodox 
theologians  moved,  and  scholasticism  developed  rapidly. 

Like  the  schoolmen  of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  Lutheran 
theologians  had,  in  the  Formula  of  Concord,  a  closed 
system.     Its   acceptance   was   regarded   as   necessary   to 

•  For  the  text  of  The  Book  of  Concord  see  Mueller's  Die  symhoUschen 
Biicher  der  evangelisch-luthervichen  Kirche ;  for  an  Enplish  translation  see 
Jacob's  Book  of  Concord.  On  the  controversies  leading  up  to  it  see  Schaffa 
Creeds  qf  Christendom^  vol.  i. 


VIII.]  PROTESTANT  SCHOLASTICISM  145 

salvation,  because  it  set  forth  the  true  interpretation  of 
the  Bible.  To  depart  from  it  or  correct  it  in  any  way 
was  out  of  the  question.  Theological  speculation  must 
take  it  for  granted,  and  the  duty  of  the  theologian  was  to 
move  always  within  set  bounds,  systematising,  elucidating, 
and  defending  truth  already  fully  given  and  unalterably 
fixed.  As  in  all  scholasticism  the  importance  of  a  particu- 
lar doctrine  came  to  depend  upon  its  place  in  the  system 
rather  than  upon  its  practical  relation  to  life.  Truth  was 
gained,  not  from  the  religious  and  moral  experience  of 
individual  or  church,  but  by  logical  deduction  from  the 
accepted  system,  and  it  was  tested  by  its  consistency  with 
the  larger  whole. 

There  was  little  new  in  the  scholasticism  of  the  period. 
The  theology,  in  spite  of  many  differences  in  detail,  was 
very  largely  that  of  the  Middle  Ages.  Reason  and  revela- 
tion were  employed  in  a  similar  way,  and  the  method  of 
treatment  was  identical.  The  reigning  philosophy  was 
still  that  of  Aristotle,  as  understood  by  the  mediaeval 
schoolmen,  and  the  supernatural  realm  was  conceived  in 
the  same  objective  and  realistic  fashion.  Compared  with 
that  of  the  Middle  Ages,  Protestant  scholasticism  was 
much  more  barren,  and  at  the  same  time  narrower  and 
more  oppressive.  Instead  of  attempting  to  cover  the 
whole  field  of  human  knowledge,  and  bring  science  and 
philosophy  and  politics  under  the  dominion  of  religion, 
the  schoolmen  of  the  seventeenth  century  confined  them- 
selves strictly  to  the  sphere  of  theology.  Of  the  new  science 
and  philosophy  that  were  making  headway  in  the  world 
outside  they  took  no  account.  They  were  not  in  any 
sense  leaders  of  world-thought  as  the  great  mediaeval 
schoolmen  were.  Moreover,  their  theology  itself,  at  least 
in  many  of  its  details,  was  that  of  a  sect  not  of  the  world- 
church.  The  Formula  of  Concord  was  rejected,  not  only 
by  all  Catholics,  but  by  Reformed  Protestants,  and  by  many 
Lutherans  as  well.    There  was  also  much  less  freedom  and 


UG  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

room  for  speculation  under  its  control  than  in  the  Middle 
Ages.  It  was  elaborate  and  exhaustive  in  its  treatment 
of  a  great  variety  of  topics,  while  in  the  Middle  Ages  the 
official  dogmas  were  few  and,  for  the  most  part,  of  a  very 
general  character.  It  is  not  surprising  that,  in  spite  of 
the  immense  amount  of  work  done,  and  the  elaborate 
dogmatic  systems  produced  by  the  Lutheran  theologians 
of  the  seventeenth  century,  the  period,  even  from  a  theo- 
logical point  of  view,  was  barren  and  dreary  to  the  last 
degree.  Of  dogmatics  there  was  plenty,  for  it  was  regarded 
as  the  principal  theological  discipline,  and  completely  over- 
shadowed Biblical,  historical,  and  all  other  studies.  But 
it  was  a  dogmatic  of  the  narrowest  type,  without  relation 
to  the  thought  of  the  world  at  large,  and  without  effect 
upon  the  religious  and  moral  life  of  Christian  people. 

The  most  original  part  of  the  theology  of  the  day  was  the 
doctrine  of  the  Bible,  which  was  worked  out  more  carefully 
and  elaborately  than  ever  before.^  In  opposition  to  the 
Catholic  dependence  upon  the  authority  of  tradition,  it 
became  necessary,  in  order  to  guarantee  the  truth  of 
Lutheran  theology,  to  treat  the  Bible  as  an  external  and 
objective  standard,  possessing  independent  value  of  its 
own  quite  apart  from  its  effect  upon  the  mind  and  heart 
of  the  reader.  The  notion  of  the  testimonium  Spiritiis 
Sancti  as  the  witness  of  the  Spirit  in  the  heart  of  the 
individual  believer  was  rejected  as  dangerously  subjective. 
The  canonic  ity  of  a  book  was  proof  that  its  divine  char- 
acter had  been  attested  to  the  Church,  and  back  of  this 
the  individual  had  no  right  to  go.  The  same  kind  of  an 
ex  opere  operato  theory  was  attached  to  the  Bible  as  the 
Catholics  attached  to  the  sacraments.  It  came  to  be 
viewed  exclusively  as  a  doctrinal  code  instead  of  a  means 
of  grace,  and  its  primary  quality  was  infallibility.     The 

1  See  e.g.  Gerhard's  Loci  Theologici,  locus  i.  ;  Calov'g  Si/stema  Loayrum 
Theologicorum,  torn.  i.  c.  iv.  ;  Quenstedt's  Theologia  Didactico-polemica, 
pars.  I.  c.  ir. 


VIII.]  PROTESTANT  SCHOLASTICISM  147 

Catholic  nature  of  the  doctrine,  though  it  was  a  doctrine 
peculiar  to  Protestants,  is  very  apparent. 

In  their  effort  to  guarantee  the  absolute  infalUbihty  of 
the  Bible  some  of  the  theologians  of  the  day  were  carried 
to  the  furthest  possible  lengths.  The  Bible  is  not  in  any 
sense  a  human  book ;  it  is  the  literal  word  of  God  in  all 
its  parts,  having  been  dictated  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  men 
acting  only  as  amanuenses.  Wlio  the  author  of  this  or 
that  book  might  be  was  of  no  consequence,  and  all 
questions  as  to  date  and  circumstances  of  composition, 
or  as  to  authenticity  and  integrity  became  unimportant 
and  irrelevant.  Not  simply  is  the  Bible  as  a  whole,  or 
the  truths  which  it  contains,  from  God,  but  every  phrase, 
word,  and  letter,  including  even  the  vowel  points  of  the 
Hebrew  Massoretic  text.  It  is  infalUble,  not  alone  in  the 
sphere  of  religion  and  morals,  but  in  history,  geography, 
geology,  astronomy,  and  every  other  field  upon  which  it 
touches.  There  can  be  no  inaccuracies  and  no  discrep- 
ancies anywhere,  and  the  most  violent  hypotheses  are 
made  in  the  effort  to  reconcile  and  harmonise.  Never 
before,  indeed,  was  the  harmonising  process  carried  out 
in  so  great  detail,  and  with  so  little  regard  to  the  proba- 
bihties  of  the  case.  All  notion  of  historic  development 
was  lost,  and  all  idea  of  successive  stages  in  the  process 
of  divine  revelation.  The  Bible  was  treated  simply  as  a 
collection  of  proof  texts  for  the  doctrines  of  Protestant 
theology,  more  particularly  for  those  contained  in  the 
Formula  of  Concord,  and  one  part  of  it  was  given  the  same 
weight  as  any  other  part.  The  whole  treatment  of  the 
subject  was  a  priori  to  the  last  degree.  The  Bible  must 
be  an  adequate  authority,  and  hence  it  must  be  absolutely 
infahible  and  perfect  in  all  its  parts  and  in  all  respects. 
Even  the  quality  of  divinity  was  ascribed  to  it  by  some, 
and  the  most  crass  and  magical  ideas  of  its  virtue  and 
efficacy  became  common  among  the  rank  and  file. 

Another  matter  in  which  the  scholastic  spirit  and  method 


148  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

had  large  play,  and  the  Lutheran  theologians  went  beyond 
the  schoolmen  of  the  Middle  Ages,  was  the  doctrine  of  the 
person  of  Christ.  Luther  insisted  most  earnestly  upon  the 
complete  union  of  His  divine  and  human  natures,  because 
without  it  His  work  would  be  vain  and  man's  redemption 
a  delusion.  It  was  not  a  speculative  affair  with  him, 
but  a  thing  of  profound  and  immediate  religious  concern. 
A  similar  interest  caused  him  to  lay  stress  upon  the  real 
presence  of  Christ  in  the  eucharist,  but  in  the  controversy 
over  the  matter  with  Zwingli  and  others  he  was  led  rather 
deeply  into  metaphysical  and  theological  speculation, 
and  into  scholastic  subtleties  quite  unlike  his  usual  vein. 
To  explain  the  real  presence,  he  invoked  the  theory  of  the 
ubiquity  of  Christ's  body,  and  to  justify  ubiquity  the 
theory  of  the  communicatio  idiomatumy  or  the  communi- 
cation of  the  attributes  of  Christ's  divine  nature  to  His 
human  nature,  imparting  to  it  the  qualities  of  omnipotence, 
omniscience,  and  particularly  omnipresence.  By  the 
Lutheran  theologians  of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth 
centuries  the  subject  was  discussed  in  great  detail.  What 
was  secondary  with  Luther  they  made  primary,  and 
theories  which  he  had  appealed  to  only  to  justify  and 
explain  vital  religious  values  were  treated  by  them  as 
independent  theologumena  detached  from  all  experience. 
Thus  viewed,  they  became  excellent  material  for  scholastic 
discussion,  and  much  was  made  of  them  both  before  and 
after  the  adoption  of  the  Formula  of  Concord.  What  is 
the  extent  of  the  communicatio  idiomatum  ?  Does  it 
embrace  all  the  divine  attributes,  or  only  a  part  of  them  ? 
Is  ubiquity  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  omnipresence,  or 
only  multipresence  ?  Is  it  absolute  or  only  relative, 
necessary  or  dependent  on  the  will  ?  These  and  other 
similar  questions  were  eagerly  discussed  in  connection 
both  with  Christology  and  with  the  doctrine  of  the 
eucharist.^     Because  of  their  bearing  upon  the  latter, 

I  Cf.  the  Formula  of  Concord,  chaps,  yii.  and  viii. 


Till.]  PROTESTANT  SCHOLASTICISM  149 

in  fact,  they  had  more  than  merely  speculative  importance, 
particularly  in  the  controversy  between  the  Genuine 
Lutherans  and  the  Calvinists  and  Crypto-Calvinists.  It 
is  impossible  here  to  enter  into  the  details  of  these  and 
similar  discussions.  I  have  referred  to  them  only  to 
illustrate  the  scholastic  character  of  the  theology  of  the 
day  and  the  kind  of  questions  that  engaged  chief  attention. 

In  the  Reformed  churches  the  conditions  were  much  the 
same.  The  theory  of  the  Bible,  elaborated  by  such 
theologians  as  the  older  and  younger  Buxtorf,  was  to  all 
intents  and  purposes  identical  with  the  theory  of  their 
Lutheran  contemporaries,  though  less  magical  and  material- 
istic. In  Christology,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Reformed 
theologians  stood  commonly  at  the  opposite  pole  from  the 
Lutherans.  Instead  of  emphasising  the  union  of  the 
divine  and  human  natures  in  Christ,  they  were  inclined 
rather  to  emphasise  their  distinction,  following  in  this  the 
lead  of  Calvin.  And  so  the  communicatio  idiomatum  and 
the  ubiquity  of  Christ's  body  were  rejected,  and  tendencies 
akin  to  the  modern  theory  of  kenosis  were  not  uncommon. 

More  important  in  the  Reformed  churches  of  the  period 
was  the  doctrine  of  predestination.  It  was  generally 
accepted  from  the  time  of  Zwingli  on,  and  gained  entrance, 
though  in  a  comparatively  mild  form,  into  a  number  of 
Reformed  confessions.  It  was  first  made  the  subject  of 
serious  controversy  at  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth 
century  in  Holland,  where  liberalism  was  more  or  less 
in  the  air.  Prominent  among  the  critics  of  Calvinism 
there  was  Jakob  van  Herman,  or  Arminius,  the  principal 
theologian  of  the  opposition,  whose  name  was  ultimately 
given  to  the  whole  movement ;  ^  Simon  Episcopius,  Jan 
Uyttenbogaert,  and  the  great  lawyer  and  statesman, 
Hugo  Grotius.  Their  position  was  set  forth  in  1610 
in  a  document  known  as  the  Remonstrance.  ^     It  con- 

1  English  translation  of  Armmius's  Works  by  Nichols,  1825  «gf.,  in  3  Tola. 
•  See  SchafTs  Creeds  of  Ghrirtendomt  vol.  iii.  p.  545  sq. 


150  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

sisted  of  five  negative  and  five  positive  articles,  the 
former  rejecting  unconditional  predestination,  both  in 
its  supra-  and  infra-lapsarian  forms,  limited  atonement, 
irresistible  grace,  and  perseverance  of  the  saints,  and 
the  latter  maintaining  conditional  predestination,  universal 
atonement,  and  the  necessity  but  resistibility  of  grace. 
In  the  last  article  the  possibility  of  falling  from  grace  is 
referred  to,  but  not  positively  asserted. 

The  party  suffered  a  complete  defeat  at  the  Synod  of 
Dort  in  1619,  and  the  canons  adopted  there  contain  a 
clear  and  definite  though  not  extreme  statement  of  the 
Calvinistic  position  upon  the  matters  in  dispute.  They 
teach  unconditional  predestination,  limited  atonement, 
human  inability,  the  irresistibility  of  grace,  and  the 
perseverance  of  the  saints — the  so-called  five  points  of 
Calvinism.^ 

In  this  connection  attention  may  be  called  to  an 
interesting  modification  of  the  traditional  doctrine  of 
the  atonement  introduced  by  Grotius  in  his  work.  On  the 
Satisfaction  of  Christ,  published  in  1617.^  In  this  work 
it  is  maintained  that  Christ  died,  not  because  God  could 
not  forgive  sin  unless  atonement  were  made  and  His 
Justice  satisfied,  but  in  order  to  show  the  heinousness  of 
sin.  If  it  were  forgiven  without  penalty  it  might  seem  of 
little  consequence.  In  place  of  the  commercial  relationship 
of  creditor  and  debtor,  which  Anselm  had  conceived  to  exist 
between  God  and  man,  the  lawyer  and  statesman,  Grotius, 
put  the  governmental  relationship.  A  ruler  has  the  right 
to  remit  a  penalty  provided  the  end  for  which  it  was  fixed 
can  be  attained  in  another  way.  The  end  of  all  penalty 
is  not  to  avenge  sin,  but  to  preserve  order  and  deter 
from  transgressions.  It  looks  to  the  future,  not  to 
the   past.     And   hence  Christ   died   in  order   that   the 

1  See  Schaffs  Greeds  of  Christendom,  vol.  iii.  p.  550  sq. 

'  Defensio  fidei  Cafhnlicae  de  satis  fact  ione  Christi  adversus  Faustum 
Soeinum;  Opera  thetlogica  (Amsterdam,  1679),  torn.  iii.  col.  297  «2« 
Eoglish  translation  by  F.  H.  Foster  (Andover,  1889). 


VIII.]  PBOTESTANT  SCHOLASTICrSM  161 

awfulness  of  sin  miglit  be  exhibited,  and  thus  men 
restrained  from  it. 

The  artificial  character  of  the  doctrine  is  manifest  at  a 
glance.  It  is  a  capital  example  of  the  scholastic  method 
of  meeting  difficulties  by  framing  an  abstract  theory  which 
has  no  basis  in  fact  and  no  contact  with  reality.  The 
theory  was  considered  by  Grotius'  opponents  a  fatal  error, 
completely  undermining  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement, 
and  it  found  no  favour  except  among  the  Arminians,  and 
was  not  universally  adopted  even  by  them.  But  that  it 
may  be  held  by  high  Calvinists  is  proved  by  its  vogue 
among  the  Edwardean  theologians  of  New  England, 
beginning  with  the  younger  Edwards. 

The  high  Calvinism  formulated  at  the  Synod  of 
Dort  prevailed  almost  unquestioned  in  Holland,  France, 
Switzerland,  Scotland,  and  among  the  Puritans  of  England 
for  some  generations.  At  the  Protestant  college  of 
Saumur,  in  Central  France,  the  effort  was  made  by  certain 
theologians  to  render  the  system  less  offensive  and  more 
comprehensible  at  two  or  three  points.  Moses  Amyraut, 
for  instance,  taught  that  divine  grace  acts  not  directly 
upon  the  will,  but  upon  the  intellect  which  controls  the 
will ;  and  his  pupil.  Pa] on,  maintained  that  it  acts  only 
indirectly  even  upon  the  intellect.  Thus  it  was  thought 
that  the  divine  activity  was  made  less  arbitrary  and 
mechanical,  and  its  relation  to  human  activity  rendered 
psychologically  expUcable.  Amyraut  also  drew  a  dis- 
tinction between  natural  and  moral  inabiUty,  which  later 
became  famous  in  the  Edwardean  theology  of  New 
England.  He  declared  that  every  man  has  the  natural 
abihty,  but  lacks  the  moral  abiHty,  that  is,  the  will,  to 
believe,  until  moved  thereto  by  regenerating  grace.  More 
interesting  and  pregnant  was  the  suggestion  made  in 
connection  with  his  theory  of  hypothetical  universal  grace 
that  Grod*s  end  in  creation  and  redemption  was  not  the 
exhibition  of  His  glory,  but  the  exercise  of  His  goodness. 


152  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

This  was  fitted  to  transform  the  Calvinistic  system,  had  it 
been  followed  up,  as  it  was  not.^ 

A  colleague  of  Amyraut,  Joshua  La  Place,  introduced  a 
modification  into  the  current  doctrine  of  original  sin  by 
substituting  what  is  known  as  mediate  for  immediate 
imputation.  Immediate  imputation  means  that  the 
primary  ground  of  our  condemnation  is  Adam's  sin,  the 
guilt  of  which  is  reckoned  to  us  by  God.  The  actual 
sinful  nature  with  which  every  man  is  born  is  a  part  of  the 
consequent  punishment.  La  Place,  on  the  contrary, 
taught  that  men  are  condemned  primarily  for  their  own 
sin,  and  that  the  guilt  of  Adam's  fall  is  counted  to  them  as 
a  penalty  therefor.  Thus  he  thought  the  justice  of  God 
was  safeguarded,  and  the  whole  doctrine  of  original  sin 
made  more  comprehensible  and  reasonable.^ 

The  scholasticism  of  all  this  kind  of  thing  is  very  evident. 
The  modifications  of  current  views  suggested  by  Amyraut 
and  La  Place  were,  for  the  most  part,  simply  verbal.  An 
indirect  instead  of  a  direct  divine  control,  moral  instead  of 
natural  inability,  a  universal  grace,  which  is  hypothetical 
only,  instead  of  a  limited  atonement,  mediate  instead  of 
immediate  imputation — all  this  is  possible  only  when  form 
means  more  than  substance  and  appearance  more  than 
reality.  The  practical  effect  in  every  case  is  recognised 
to  be  the  same  as  on  the  older  view,  but  it  is  supposed  that 
difficulties  are  met  by  changes  of  statement.  The  diffi- 
culties so  met  are  only  formal,  not  real.  They  Ue  in  the 
sphere  of  logic,  not  of  life,  the  sphere  to  which  scholasti- 
cism belongs. 

The  innovations  of  Amyraut  and  La  Place  were  not 
intended  to  imdermine  or  weaken  Calvinism  in  any  way, 
but  they  were  symptomatic  of  a  growing  spirit  of  dis- 

1  Among  Amyraut's  writings  the  most  important  are  his  TraitS  de  la 
Pridestination  (1634),  his  De  la  Justification  (1638),  and  his  Exerdtatio  de 
Oratia  universali  (1646).  See  Saigey's  Amyraut,  sa  vie  et  zes  icrites  (1849), 
and  Haag's  La  France  Protestante,  vol.  i.  72  sq.  (1846). 

>  S«e  hi«  De  imputtUione primi peccaii  Adami  (1655). 


VIII.]  PROTESTANT  SCHOLASTICISM  163 

content  with  the  current  statements  of  the  system,  and 
slight  and,  for  the  most  part,  only  formal  as  they  were, 
they  caused  great  excitement  both  in  France  and  Switzer- 
land. The  Saumur  theologians  succeeded  in  convincing 
their  Protestant  countrymen  of  their  orthodoxy,  but  in 
Switzerland  feeling  against  them  ran  high,  and  in  1675 
the  famous  Formula  Consensus  was  drawn  up  by  Heidegger 
of  Zurich,  as  a  protest  against  their  teachings,  and  was 
adopted  by  a  number  of  Swiss  cities.  In  it  the  current 
Calviuism  of  the  day  was  given  its  most  elaborate  and 
scholastic  official  expression.^ 

More  profoundly  than  by  the  teaching  of  the  Saumur 
school  scholastic  Calvinism  was  affected  by  the  so-called 
Federal  theology,  or  the  theology  of  the  covenants,  which 
was  taught  in  the  sixteenth  century  by  Bullinger  of 
Zurich,  Olevian,  one  of  the  authors  of  the  Heidelberg 
Catechism,  and  others.  It  had  its  largest  development 
in  the  following  century  in  Holland  at  the  hands  of 
Cocceius,^  and  from  him  it  gaiued  the  name  Cocceianism, 
by  which  it  was  widely  known.  It  was  Biblical  rather 
than  speculative  in  character.  It  taught,  upon  the  basis 
of  the  Scriptures,  a  covenant  of  works  and  a  covenant  of 
grace  which  God  made  successively  with  man,  and  by 
which  He  carried  out  His  eternal  purpose  for  the  redemp- 
tion of  the  elect.  Cocceius  was  an  orthodox  Calvinist, 
and  the  doctrine  as  he  taught  it  was  entirely  in  accord 
with  the  Calvinism  of  the  day,  but  it  meant  a  new  emphasis 
and  a  new  point  of  view.  Instead  of  centring  attention 
upon  the  eternal  decree  of  God,  the  covenant  theology 
laid  stress  upon  His  historical  activity  in  dealing  with  men 
first  in  one  way,  and  then  when  that  failed,  in  another. 
The  tendency  of  such  a  change  of  int-erest  was  inevitably 

1  For  the  text  of  the  Formula  Consensus  see  Miiller's  Die  Bekenntnis- 
schriften  der  reformierten  Kirche,  p.  861.  The  assertion  of  the  inspiration 
of  the  Hebrew  vowel-points  in  Article  ii.  was  due  to  the  denial  of  it  by  Looif 
Cappel,  a  colleague  of  AmjTaut  and  La  Place. 

•  See  his  Summa  Docirinae  dt  Foedere  et  Testamentis  Dei  (1648) 


154  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

to  weaken  the  dominance  of  the  scholastic  orthodoxy  of 
the  day,  though  it  was  not  reahsed  for  a  long  time.  In- 
deed, the  doctrine  of  the  covenants  was  widely  accepted 
by  orthodox  Calvinists,  and  found  its  way  into  the  Irish 
articles  of  1615,  the  Westminster  Confession  of  1645,  and 
the  Swiss  Formula  Consensus  of  1675,  all  of  them  strongly 
and  emphatically  Calvinistic,  and  the  last  of  them,  at  any 
rate,  genuinely  scholastic. 

In  spite  of  the  various  influences  tending  to  undermine 
the  sway  of  the  scholastic  spirit  and  method,  Reformed 
theology,  like  Lutheran,  continued  in  most  quarters  to  be 
controlled  by  both  until  almost  the  close  of  the  seventeenth 
century.  When  the  break  came  it  was  due,  not  to  modifi- 
cations of  the  existing  systems,  painfully  and  laboriously 
wrought  from  within,  but  to  extraneous  forces  altogether. 
Some  of  those  forces  will  be  considered  in  the  following 
chapten. 


ix.]  PIETISM  166 


CHAPTER  IX 

PIETISM 

I.  Oerman  Pietism 

PiETiSTTC  tendencies  appeared  both  in  Lutheran  and 
Reformed  circles  before  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
but  they  had  their  largest  development  in  the  late  seven- 
teenth and  early  eighteenth  centuries.  At  the  close  of 
the  Thirty  Years'  War  religious  life  in  Protestant  "Germany 
was  at  a  low  ebb.  The  control  of  the  Church  by  the  civil 
government  in  the  various  principaUties  did  not  make 
for  spirituality.  The  interpretation  of  saving  faith  in 
terms  of  intellectual  assent,  the  prevalence  of  scholasti- 
cism, the  emphasis  upon  formal  orthodoxy,  the  absorption 
of  the  leading  men  of  the  Church  in  theological  contro- 
versy, all  tended  to  depress  the  reUgious  and  moral  life 
of  the  country,  and  the  war  itself  had  demoralising  effects 
and  accentuated  conditions  already  widespread. 

The  specific  movement  known  as  German  Pietism 
began  only  as  an  effort  to  improve  local  rehgious  and  moral 
conditions  in  Frankfort-on-Main,  but  it  soon  spread 
throughout  the  country.  Its  great  protagonist  was  PhiHp 
Jacob  Spener,  who  was  bom  in  1633,  and  held  important 
clerical  positions  successively  in  Frankfort,  Dresden,  and 
Berlin,  until  his  death  in  1705.  Spener  was  a  man  of 
mystical,  but  practical,  temperament,  and  had  read  widely 
in  devotional  Uterature,  both  mediaeval  and  modern. 
It  was  not  the  theosophy  or  the  quietism  of  the  mystics 
that  attracted  him  ;    he  was  too  sober-minded  to  fed 


156  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

sympatliy  with  the  former,  and  of  too  active  a  tempera- 
ment to  find  the  latter  congenial ;  but  their  emphasis 
on  inner  vital  Christianity  and  their  hostility  to  a  formal 
and  dead  theology.  He  felt  the  influence  particularly 
of  the  famous  German  mystic,  Johann  Arndt,  whose 
Wdhres  Christenthum  was  perhaps  the  best  known  de- 
votional work  of  the  day  in  Germany. 

In  Frankfort,  Spener  became  aroused  by  the  low  re- 
ligious and  moral  tone  of  the  city,  and  he  undertook  to 
raise  it  by  making  his  preaching  more  directly  practical,  by 
laying  emphasis  upon  life  rather  than  doctrine,  by  multi- 
plying his  pastoral  labours,  and  particularly  by  holding 
meetings  in  his  own  house  for  the  devotional  study  of  the 
Bible,  and  for  prayer  and  edification.  A  marked  feature 
of  his  preaching  was  his  strong  eschatological  emphasis. 
He  believed  that  the  last  times  were  at  hand,  and  that 
the  return  of  Christ  and  the  establishment  of  the 
Messianic  Kingdom  would  take  place  in  the  near  future.* 
This  gave  to  much  of  his  work  an  enthusiastic  and  some- 
what feverish  character  not  unlike  that  which  marked 
the  primitive  days  of  the  Christian  Church. 
r/  f  In  3^65  he  wrote  a  preface  to  an  edition  of  Arndt's 
]  sermons,  which  was  issued  separately  a  few  months  later 
under  the  title  of  Pia  Desideria,  and  was  read  very  widely. 
With  its  publication  Spener  sprang  at  once  into  promin- 
ence, and  his  influence  began  to  be  felt  throughout  the 
country.  The  book  is  in  two  parts,  the  first  portraying 
the  evil  conditions  of  the  day — religious  indifference, 
absorption  in  scholastic  theology,  and  the  wide  prevalence 
of  immorality — and  maintaining  the  possibility  of  better 
things ;  the  second  setting  forth  the  methods  to  be  employed 
in  effecting  a  reformation.  The  second  part  contains 
what  may  be  called  the  programme  of  the  pietistic  move- 
ment. The  following  matters  are  emphasised  as  particu- 
larly important :— First,  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  by 

^  Ot  especiallj  his  Bthauptwig  der  Eoffnung  Mt^tiger  betserer  Zeitm, 


ir.]  PIETISM  167 

all  classes  of  Christians.  In  this  connection  Spener 
recommends  meetings  for  Bible-reading  and  spiritual 
edification  such  as  he  was  holding  in  Frankfort.  These 
were  to  be  made  centres  of  religious  life  for  the  leavening 
of  the  whole  Church.  They  became  very  common  among 
the  Pietists,  and  were  known  commonly  as  collegia  pietatis. 
Secondly,  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers,  involving 
the  duty  of  mutual  instruction,  inspiration,  and  reproof. 
Thirdly,  the  practical  nature  of  Christianity,  which  con- 
sists not  in  the  knowledge,  but  in  conduct,  and  particu- 
larly in  the  exercise  of  mutual  love  and  service.  Fourthly, 
the  evils  of  religious  controversy  and  the  duty  of  dealing 
with  unbelievers  and  heretics  in  the  spirit  of  love.  Fifthly, 
the  importance  of  piety  as  well  as  of  learning  in  candidates 
for  the  ministry.  It  is  urged  that  theological  professors 
should  be  examples  of  piety,  and  should  train  their  students 
in  practical  religion  as  well  as  in  theology.  The  study  of 
such  books  as  the  Theologia  Germanica,  Tauler's  SermonSy 
and  the  Imitation  of  Christ  is  recommended,  as  also  practice 
in  pastoral  work  during  the  period  of  preparation.  These 
were  unheard-of  innovations  in  theological  education. 
Finally,  Spener  insists  upon  the  necessity  of  making 
preaching  more  simple  and  practical.  The  following 
quotation  from  his  discussion  of  the  last  point  shows  his 
general  interest  with  sufficient  clearness : — '  Since  our 
eatire  Christianity  consists  in  the  inner  or  new  man,  and 
its  soul  is  faith,  and  the  effects  of  faith  are  the  fruits  of 
life,  I  regard  it  as  of  the  greatest  importance  that  sermons 
should  be  wholly  directed  to  this  end.  On  the  one  hand 
they  should  exhibit  God's  rich  benefits,  as  they  affect  the 
inner  man,  in  such  a  way  that  faith  is  advanced  and  the 
inner  man  forwarded  in  it.  On  the  other  hand  they 
should  not  merely  incite  to  external  acts  of  virtue  and 
restrain  from  external  acts  of  vice,  as  the  moral  philosophy 
of  the  heathen  does,  but  should  lay  the  foundation  in  the 
heart.    They   should   show   that  all   is  pure  hypocrisy, 


158  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

which  does  not  come  from  the  heart,  and  so  accustom  the 
people  to  cultivate  love  to  God  and  their  neighbours  and 
to  act  from  it  as  a  motive.'  * 

The  book  suggested,  or  at  any  rate  foreshadowed,  most 
of  the  points  which  were  later  emphasised  by  the  Pietists, 
and  became  characteristic  of  the  pietistic  movement. 
Biblical  study  for  devotional  and  practical  purposes, 
depreciation  of  scholastic  and  polemic  theology,  emphasis 
of  the  feelings  and  will  at  the  expense  of  the  intellect,  love 
for  devotional  literature,  especially  of  a  mystical  tjrpe, 
insistence  upon  the  necessity  of  personal  faith  and  growth 
in  Christian  perfection,  the  recognition  of  a  true  kernel 
within  the  Church,  an  ecclesiola  in  ecclesia  made  up  of 
the  truly  regenerate,  and  the  new  independence  given  the 
laity  by  the  formation  of  the  collegia  pietatis,  in  which 
their  religious  life  found  expression  apart  from  the  Church 
and  its  organised  ministrations.  The  last  point  is  of 
especial  importance.  The  pietistic  movement  was  largely 
a  lay  movement.  Not  that  the  clergy  held  aloof  and  bore 
no  share  in  it,  but  that  the  principle  of  the  universal 
priesthood  of  believers  underlay  it,  and  expressed  itself 
in  new  religious  activities  on  the  part  of  the  people. 

Spener  was  an  orthodox  Lutheran,  and  made  no  attack 
upon  current  theology.  Nevertheless  his  theological 
attitude  was  very  dijBferent  from  that  of  most  of  his  con- 
temporaries. He  deprecated  what  seemed  to  him  an  over- 
emphasis upon  the  theoretical  side  of  religion,  and  insisted 
that  personal  piety,  the  bent  of  the  heart  and  life,  was  far 
more  important  than  doctrinal  soundness.  He  felt,  too, 
that  the  theologians  of  the  day  were  interested  in  the  less 
rather  than  the  more  important  doctrines,  and  he  wished 

1  p.  101,  Leipzig  edition  of  1841.  In  addition  to  the  Fia  Desideria 
Spener  puV)lisheil  in  1677  a  book  on  the  spiritual  priesthood  {Das  Oeistliche 
Priesterthum),  and  this  was  followed  in  the  same  year  by  a  Letter  to  a 
Foreign  Theologian  (Sendschreiben  an  einen  Christeifrigen  ausldndischen 
Th^ologen).  These  three  books  set  forth  adequately  his  controlling  principles. 
For  an  exhaustive  bibliography  of  Spener's  writings  see  the  Xt/«  by 
Grueuberg,  roL  iii. 


IX.]  PIETISM  159 

to  bring  into  prominence  those  which  had  direct  effect 
upon  the  personal  religious  life,  particularly  the  doctrines 
of  salvation.  The  value  of  a  beUef,  he  maintained,  de- 
pended wholly  upon  its  practical  bearing.  He  distin- 
guished between  essential  and  non-essential  elements  in 
the  traditional  faith,  and  assumed  a  freer  attitude  than  was 
customary  toward  the  official  symbols. 

One  of  the  principal  causes  of  the  low  spiritual  and 
moral  tone  of  the  Church,  he  felt,  was  a  misunderstanding 
of  the  nature  of  saving  faith,  leading  to  an  unfortunate 
divorce  between  justification  and  sanctification,  between 
beUef  and  life.  In  his  desire  to  meet  this  fundamental 
error  he  emphasised  the  doctrine  of  regeneration,  and 
insisted  that  the  all-important  thing  was  the  transforma- 
tion of  character  through  vital  union  with  Christ.  Only 
where  the  life  is  actually  changed  and  the  spirit  and  motive 
of  Christ  control  one's  conduct,  has  a  person  any  right  to 
think  that  he  has  been  bom  again  and  is  to  be  counted 
of  the  number  of  the  saved.  Christian  conduct  Spener 
interpreted  in  other-worldly  terms.  Not,  as  with  Luther, 
victory  over  the  world,  but  escape  from  it  was  his  ideal. 
Piety  was  to  show  itself  in  devotion  to  spiritual  and 
supernal  things,  and  in  the  transfer  of  affection  and  inter- 
est from  this  world  to  another.  In  general,  it  may  be  said 
that  pietism,  whether  in  Holland,  Switzerland,  Germany, 
or  elsewhere,  represented  an  ascetic  reaction  against  the 
common  worldliness  of  the  average  Christian,  a  reaction 
similar  in  principle  to  that  involved  in  monasticism,  but 
less  thoroughgoing  in  practice. 

Spener  felt  that  the  Protestant  Reformation  had  not 
completed  its  work,  that  the  purification  of  doctrine  needed 
to  be  followed  by  the  sanctification  of  life.  He  emphasised 
faith  as  the  condition  of  salvation  in  good  Lutheran 
fashion,  and  yet  his  interpretation  of  the  Christian  life 
was  more  CathoHc  than  Protestant.  He  saw  to  what 
indifference  and  carelessness  the  current  notions  of  justifi- 


160  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

cation  and  of  assurance  were  leading,  and  he  took  issue 
with  both,  insisting  that  justification  means  nothing 
without  regeneration  and  sanctification,  and  that  assur- 
ance is  a  dangerous  thing  if  based  upon  aught  but  the 
evidence  of  a  transformed  and  holy  life.  It  is  clear  that 
the  controlling  interest  throughout  was  not  reUgious,  as 
with  Luther,  but  moral.  Not  a  man's  relation  to  God 
was  the  important  thing,  but  his  character  and  conduct. 
Salvation  is  a  present  reality,  but  it  is  not  so  much  peace 
with  God  and  the  consciousness  of  divine  sonship  as  hoU- 
ness  of  life  wrought  by  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit.  In 
this  connection  Spener  insisted  upon  the  possibihty  and 
importance  of  Christian  perfection,  by  which  he  meant 
not  a  strict  legal  sinlessness,  but  the  constant  direction  of 
the  heart  toward  holiness,  and  continual  and  undeviating 
progress  in  it.  To  be  content  with  anything  less  was  a 
mark  of  an  unregenerate  heart.  Introspection  and  self- 
examination  became  under  these  circumstances  almost 
inevitable,  and  found  constant  encouragement  and  exercise 
in  the  collegia  pietatis. 

The  pietism  of  Spener  and  his  followers  was  essentially 
mediaeval  in  its  estimate  of  man  and  the  world.  Distrust 
of  human  nature  and  despair  of  the  salvability  of  society 
were  both  characteristic  of  it.  Salvation  meant  escape 
from  an  evil  world  for  a  few  elect  souls  who  banded  to- 
gether for  spiritual  communion  and  mutual  edification, 
and  these  elect  souls  were  not  the  Christian  Church,  but  a 
small  circle  within  the  larger  body.  Spener,  to  be  sure, 
was  very  eager  and  zealous  to  enlarge  this  circle,  to  extend 
the  benefits  of  the  great  revival  of  religion  to  the  entire 
membership  of  the  Church,  and  to  permeate  the  whole 
community  with  its  principles ;  but  after  all  conversion 
meant  a  selective  process,  and  withdrew  a  man's  interest 
not  simply  from  the  world,  but  also,  to  some  degree  at 
least,  from  the  Church. 

Though  mediaeval,  both  in  its  estimate  of  the  world 


IX.]  PIETISM  161 

and  man,  and  in  its  conception  of  salvation,  pietism  was 
a  decided  advance  upon  the  Protestantism  of  the  day  and 
a  prophecy  of  a  new  age  to  come.  The  vitalising  of 
Christian  piety,  the  breaking  of  scholasticism's  control, 
the  recognition  of  religious  experience  as  the  chief  basis 
of  theology,  the  emphasis  of  the  will  instead  of  the  intellect 
in  religion,  the  prominence  given  to  the  emotions,  and  above 
all  the  individualism  of  the  whole  movement  and  its 
hostility  to  ecclesiasticism,  sacramentarianism,  and  sacer- 
dotalism, meant  much  for  days  to  come.  Pietism  was  one 
of  the  forces  which  brought  the  modern  age  in  the  religious 
life  of  Germany.  It  preceded  rationalism,  and,  unlike 
the  latter  as  it  was  in  spirit  and  interest,  it  yet  prepared 
the  way  for  it  by  weakening  the  hold  of  the  ecclesiastical 
institution  with  its  creeds  and  sacraments.  It  was  as 
individualistic  as  rationalism,  though  in  a  very  different 
way,  and  in  Germany  at  least  it  represented,  on  the  whole, 
advance  not  reaction  in  the  development  of  religious 
thought. 

In  spite  of  the  contrast  in  spirit  and  tendency  between 
the  Pietists  and  their  Lutheran  brethren,  and  in  spite  of 
the  bitter  controversy  to  which  the  movement  gave  rise, 
most  of  the  Pietists  remained  within  the  Lutheran  body 
(separation  taking  place  only  in  the  case  of  the  Moravians), 
and  before  the  death  of  Francke,  the  second  great  leader  of 
the  party,  which  occurred  in  1727,  pietism  had  become  the 
dominant  force  in  German  religious  life.  Of  its  immense 
services  in  the  field  of  charitable  and  religious  work — the 
foundation  of  orphan  asylums,  the  education  of  the  young, 
the  care  of  the  poor,  the  promotion  of  foreign  missions — 
it  is  impossible  to  speak  here.  Its  great  influence  was 
before  long  undermined  by  rationalism,  v.hich  spread 
rapidly  after  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century,  but  it 
never  ceased  to  make  itself  felt,  and  it  became  one  of  the 
factors  in  the  revival  of  religion,  and  the  reconstruction 
of  theology  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

L 


162  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [oa. 

n.  English  Evangelicalism 

In  England  pietism  came  to  most  striking  expression 
in  the  great  evangelical  revival  of  the  eighteenth  century. 
Mystical  tendencies  had  appeared  in  the  previous  century, 
most  notably  in  the  Society  of  Friends,  in  which  the  im- 
mediate presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  making  all  external 
forms  and  ceremonies,  sacraments  and  priesthood  un- 
necessary, was  emphasised  as  it  had  not  been  since  the 
primitive  days  of  Christianity. ^  Mystical  piety  of  a  some- 
what extreme  type  was  exemplified  also  by  the  non- juror 
William  Law,  the  author  of  two  famous  devotional  works, 
A  Practical  Treatise  upon  Christian  Perfection,  and  A 
Serious  Call  to  a  Devout  and  Holy  Life. 

John  Wesley,  to  whom  the  evangelical  revival  was 
chiefly  due,  was  greatly  influenced  by  Law's  writings, 
but  the  determining  impulse  came  from  German  pietism 
through  his  association  with  a  small  company  of  Moravians 
in  London.  Under  their  influence  he  passed  through  a 
religious  experience  in  1738,  which  he  always  referred  to 
afterwards  as  his  conversion,  although  he  had  already 
been  for  some  years  an  ordained  clergyman  of  uncommon 
piety  and  devoutness.  This  experience  he  relates  in  his 
Journal,  giving  a  detailed  account  of  the  steps  that  led  up 
to  it.  The  cHmax  is  described  in  the  following  words  : 
*  In  the  evening  I  went  very  unwillingly  to  a  society  ^  in 
Aldersgate  Street,  where  one  was  reading  Luther's  preface 
to  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  About  a  quarter  before  nine, 
while  he  was  describing  the  change  which  God  works  in 
the  heart  through  faith  in  Clirist,  I  felt  my  heart  strangely 
warmed.  I  felt  I  did  trust  in  Clirist ;  Christ,  alone  for 
salvation ;    and  an  assurance  was  given  me  that  he  had 

^  See  the  Journal  of  George  Fox  (1694  sq.),  and  Robert  Barclay's  An 
Apoloijy  for  the  True  GhrUtion  Divinify,  as  the  same  is  held  forth  and 
preached  by  the  People,  called  in  scorn,  Quakers  (1676). 

2  Compare  Wesley's  descripti<'n  of  the  institution  of  a  society  for  prayer 
and  mutual  edification,  similar  to  the  collegia  2>ietatis  of  the  GeTxnaLnTietiBi 8, 
in  his  Journal,  Works,  vol.  i.  p.  186. 


IX.]  PIETISM  163 

taken  away  my  sins,  even  mine,  and  saved  me  from  the  law 
of  sm  and  death.'  ^ 

This  event  was  epochal  in  Wesley's  life.  It  meant  a 
transfer  of  emphasis  from  baptism  to  conversion,  from 
the  Church  as  an  institution  to  the  personal  religious 
experience  of  the  individual  Christian.  It  meant  also  a 
return  to  the  genuine  but  practically  forgotten  Reformation 
platform  of  a  present  salvation  by  faith  alone,  through 
grace,  and  not  through  works.  This  was  the  birth  of 
English  evangelicalism,  and  the  beginning  of  the  great 
evangelical  revival,  for  the  preaching  of  Wesley's  new- 
found gospel  followed  as  a  matter  of  course.  Joined  by 
his  brother  Charles,  and  by  his  friend,  George  TOiitefield, 
who  had  passed  through  a  similar  experience,  Wesley 
commenced  that  extraordinary  career  of  evangelism  which 
lasted  for  fifty  years,  and  transformed  the  religious  life  of 
England. 

Like  German  pietism,  English  evangelicalism  was 
practical  in  its  aims  and  methods,  but  it  had  great  influ- 
ence in  the  sphere  of  religious  thought.  It  is  a  fact  of 
cardinal  importance  that  it  took  its  rise  in  a  period  domin- 
ated, not  by  scholasticism,  but  by  rationalism.  It  was, 
in  fact,  in  no  small  part  a  reaction  against  rationalism 
in  all  its  forms.^  Tliis  gave  it,  in  spite  of  its  kinship  with 
German  pietism,  a  very  different  character  in  many  re- 
spects. Doctrines  which  were  largely  taken  for  granted 
by  the  Pietists  of  Germany,  as  being  the  common  property, 
both  of  themselves  and  of  the  orthodox,  received  chief 
emphasis  from  Wesley  and  his  associates,  because  they 
were  denied  or  minimised  by  the  rationalists  of  the  day. 

1  Works,  vol.  i.  p  194.  I  have  used  the  first  American  edition  of  Wesley's 
Worls,  New  York,  ]827,  in  ten  volnraes. 

2  There  is  an  infelicity  in  treating  evanc^elicalisra  before  rationalism.  It 
can  be  fully  understood  (^nly  in  the  light  of  the  rationalism  against  which  it 
was  a  protest.  At  the  same  time,  even  though  it  mean  some  violation  of 
the  chronological  order,  it  seems  important  to  deal  with  ihe  various  pietistic 
movements,  which  are  so  closely  akin,  in  a  single  chapter.  But  the  anti- 
rationalistic  reactionary  character  of  evangelicalism  should  not  be  forgotten 
fof  a  moment. 


164  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

Thus  the  doctrine  of  the  Fall  gained  a  pecuhar  promin- 
ence, and  human  depravity  and  inabiUty  were  preached 
v/ith  an  earnestness  seldom  equalled.  '  The  fall  of  man,' 
Wesley  says,  '  is  the  very  foundation  of  revealed  religion. 
If  this  be  taken  away  the  Christian  system  is  subverted, 
nor  will  it  deserve  so  honourable  an  appellation  as  that  of 
a  cunningly  devised  fable.'  ^  It  was  at  this  point  that  the 
fundamental  contrast  between  the  Evangelicals  and  their 
rationalistic  contemporaries  appeared  most  clearly.  The 
tendency  of  the  age  was  to  recognise  the  natural  worth 
and  ability  of  man,  both  intellectual  and  moral.  This 
the  Evangelicals  felt  was  the  great  foe  which  had  to  be 
met  if  Christianity  were  actually  to  lay  hold  upon  the 
hearts  and  lives  of  men.  In  a  sermon  on  Original  Sin, 
Wesley  says,  '  This,  therefore,  is  the  first  grand  distinguish- 
ing point  between  heathenism  and  Christianity.  The  one 
acknowledges  that  many  men  are  infected  with  many 
vices  and  even  born  with  a  proneness  to  them  ;  but  sup- 
poses withal  that  in  some  the  natural  good  much  over- 
balances the  evil  :  the  other  declares  that  all  men  are 
conceived  in  sin  and  shapen  in  wickedness,  that  hence 
there  is  in  every  man  a  carnal  mind  which  is  enmity 
against  God,  which  is  not,  cannot  be  subject  to  His  law. 
.  .  .  Hence  we  may  secondly  learn  that  all  who  deny  this, 
call  it  original  sin,  or  by  any  other  title,  are  but  heathens 
still  in  the  fundamental  point  which  differences  heathen- 
ism from  Christianity.  They  may,  indeed,  allow  that  men 
have  many  vices  ;  that  some  are  born  with  us  ;  and  that 
consequently  we  are  not  born  altogether  so  wise  or  so 
virtuous  as  we  should  be  ;  there  being  few  that  will  roundly 
affirm  we  are  born  with  as  much  propensity  to  good  as  to 
evil,  and  that  every  man  is  by  nature  as  virtuous  and  wise 
as  Adam  was  at  his  creation.  But  here  is  the  shibboleth  : 
Is  man  by  nature  filled  with  all  manner  of  evil  ?  Is  he 
v-oid  of  all  good  ?  Is  he  wholly  false  ?  Is  his  soul  totally 
I  Works,  vol.  i.  p.  176. 


IX.]  PIETISM  165 

corrupted  ?  Or,  to  come  back  to  the  text,  is  "  every 
imagination  of  the  thoughts  of  his  heart  evil  continually  "  ? 
Allow  this,  and  you  are  so  far  a  Christian.  Deny  it,  and 
you  are  but  a  heathen  still.'  ^ 

The  greatest  barrier  in  the  way  of  a  man's  conversion 
is  pride.  As  WTiitefield  says,  '  It  is  the  want  of  an  humble 
mind,  of  a  sense  of  their  own  depravity  that  makes  men 
obstinately  shut  their  eyes  against  the  gospel.  If  they 
were  pricked  to  the  heart  with  a  lively  sense  of  their 
natural  corruption,  we  should  have  no  more  scofi&ng  at 
divine  revelation.' 

It  was  in  accordance  with  their  emphasis  upon  human 
depravity  and  helplessness  that  the  Evangelicals  made 
much  of  supernatural  redemption.  No  one  is  able  to 
save  himself  from  sin  and  from  the  punishment  which  it 
entails.  Only  divine  power  can  do  it,  and  this  is  offered 
by  Christ  alone.  The  current  interpretation  of  Christian- 
ity as  a  revelation,  supplementing  natural  religion  and 
bringing  clearer  light  and  stronger  motives  to  virtue,^ 
seemed  utterly  inadequate.  Revelation  alone  is  of  no 
value.  Even  if  a  man  knows  his  duty  he  cannot  do  it 
unless  empowered  thereto  by  God.  Thus  the  doctrine 
of  regeneration  became  of  primary  importance.  To  be 
born  again,  not  of  flesh  and  blood,  but  of  the  Spirit  of  God, 
this  was  indispensable  to  every  man. 

It  is  no  accident,  in  view  of  the  prominence  they  gave  to 
the  necessity  of  redemption,  that  the  Evangelicals  restored 
the  doctrines  of  the  deity  and  atoning  work  of  Christ  to 
the  place  of  importance  which  they  had  widely  lost.  The 
German  Pietists  took  these  doctrines  for  granted,  for 
scholastic  theology,  of  course,  accepted  them  without 
question.  But  by  the  rationalistic  school,  which  made 
Christ's  work  chiefly  or  solely  that  of  revelation,  they  had 
been  generally  denied  or  neglected,  and  it  was  inevitable 
that  the  Evangelicals  should  give  them  especial  importance. 
1  Work$^  voL  V.  p.  195,  *  See  the  next  chapter. 


166  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

They  made  so  much  of  them,  mdeed,  that  vicarious  atone- 
ment and  the  deity  of  Christ  came  to  be  regarded  as 
pecuh'arly  evangelical  doctrines,  and  the  churches  that 
accept  them,  in  distinction  from  the  Unitarian  bodies 
which  reject  both,  are  even  to-day  commonly  known  as 
evangelical  churches.  Thus  at  this  point,  as  at  many 
others,  evangelicalism  served  to  rehabilitate  traditional 
doctrines  common  both  to  Catholicism  and  Protestantism. 

I  have  spoken  of  the  necessity  of  regeneration  through 
the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  according  to  Wesley  the 
continued  presence  of  the  Spirit  is  equally  needed  if  the 
Christian  man  is  to  live  as  he  ought.  Even  though  born 
again,  he  cannot  do  God's  will  in  his  own  strength.  The 
true  Christian  life  is  supernatural  from  beginning  to  end. 
*The  author  of  faith  and  salvation  is  God  alone.  It  is 
he  that  works  in  us  both  to  will  and  to  do.  He  is  the  sole 
giver  of  every  good  gift,  and  the  sole  author  of  every 
good  work.'  ^ 

Consistently  with  this  idea  of  the  miraculous  character 
of  the  Christian  life,  Wesley  thought  of  it  not  as  the  con- 
dition of  salvation  but  as  salvation  itself.  '  By  salvation 
I  mean,'  he  says,  '  not  barely  according  to  the  vulgar 
notion  deliverance  from  hell  or  going  to  heaven,  but  a 
present  deliverance  from  sin,  a  restoration  of  the  soul  to 
its  primitive  health,  its  original  purity  ;  a  recovery  of  the 
divine  nature,  the  renewal  of  our  souls  after  the  image 
of  God  in  righteousness  and  true  holiness,  in  justice,  mercy, 
and  truth.'  ^  In  thus  recognising  salvation  as  a  present 
reality,  Wesley  was  true  to  Luther,  but  his  interpretation 
of  its  nature  was  usually  different.  His  interest,  like 
Spener's,  was  chiefly  ethical,  and  he  was  more  concerned 
in  escape  from  sin  and  the  attainment  of  holiness  than  in 
escape  from  divine  wrath  and  the  attainment  of  peace 
with  God.     It  thus  became  possible  for  him  to  assert  a 

1  'A  Farther  Appeal  to  Men  of  Reason  and  Religion,'  Works,  vol.  viiL 
p.  220.  »  Ibid.  p.  219. 


IX.]  PIETISM  167 

present  salvation  only  by  accepting  the  pietistic  doctrine 
of  Christian  perfection.  He  taught  that  Christian  per- 
fection was  attainable  instantaneously  by  the  believer  in 
this  life.  By  it  he  meant  the  uninterrupted  reign  of  love 
in  the  heart.^  But  even  this  did  not  save  him  from 
inconsistency,  and  he  frequently  taught,  in  the  common 
fashion  of  the  day,  that  this  life  is  a  probation  for  the  life 
to  come,  when  alone  salvation  begun  here  will  be  complete.^ 
And  yet  he  was  careful  always  to  maintain  intact  the 
Reformation  doctrine  of  salvation  by  faith  alone.  Nothing 
could  be  more  fully  in  accord  with  Luther's  own  teaching 
than  such  a  passage  as  the  following  :  '  Justifying  faith 
implies,  not  only  a  divine  cXeyxos  that  God  was  in  Christ 
*'  reconciling  the  world  to  himself,"  but  a  sure  trust  and 
confidence  that  Christ  died  for  my  sins,  that  He  loved  me 
and  gave  Himself  for  me.  And  the  moment  a  penitent 
sinner  believes  this  God  pardons  and  absolves  him.  And 
as  soon  as  his  pardon  or  justification  is  witnessed  to  him 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  is  saved.  He  loves  God  and  all 
mankind.  He  has  the  mind  that  was  in  Christ,  and  the 
power  to  walk  as  He  also  walked.'  ^ 

It  was  in  accordance  with  their  recognition  of  the 
miraculous  nature  of  the  Christian  life  that  the  Evangelicals 
drew  the  sharpest  possible  contrast  between  the  truly 
religious  and  the  merely  moral  man.  They  denounced 
all  man-made  righteousness  as  filthy  rags.  He  who 
trusted  to  his  own  virtue,  who  lived  honestly  and  up- 
rightly and  purely,  but  did  not  depend  for  salvation  upon 
Christ  alone,  was  the  most  dangerous  of  men.  For  the 
abandoned  sinner  there  was  hope — he  might  be  brought  to 

1  Wesley  gave  many  definitions  of  Christian  perfection  in  his  Plain 
Account  of  Christian  Perfection.  One  of  them  is  as  follows:  'Question — 
"What  is  Christian  perfection?  Answer — The  loving  God  with  all  our  heart, 
mind,  soul,  and  strength.  This  implies,  that  no  wrong  temper,  none 
contrary  to  love,  remains  in  the  soul  ;  and  that  all  the  thoughts,  words, 
and  actions  are  governed  by  pure  love'  (  Works,  vol.  viii.  p.  27). 

*  Cf.  eg.  his  ' Thoughts  on  Salvation  by  Faith,'  Works,  vol.  x.  p.  238 «2, 

*  Works,  vol.  viii.  p.  219. 


168  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

a  sense  of  his  corruptness  and  helplessness,  and  of  his  need 
of  divine  grace  ;  but  the  righteous  man  who  prided  him- 
self on  his  rectitude  and  moral  strength  was  far  from  the 
kingdom.  Humility  is  the  first  step  toward  the  Christian 
life.  To  repudiate  one's  own  goodness,  and  to  abandon 
oneself  completely  to  the  mercy  of  Christ,  is  difficult  for 
the  righteous  man,  but  it  is  absolutely  necessary  for  him 
as  well  as  for  the  worst  of  criminals.  Christianity  is  for 
the  sick,  not  for  the  well,  and  only  the  man  who  realises 
his  diseased  condition  can  profit  by  it. 

Of  a  piece  with  all  this  was  the  interpretation  of  the 
Christian  life  as  other-worldly.  Like  the  German  Pietists, 
the  Evangelicals  were  ascetic  in  their  tendency.  Their 
ideal  was  to  live  with  heart  set  constantly  upon  the  future, 
and  natural  human  interest  in  the  present  world  was 
condemned  as  irreligious.  '  Friendship  with  the  world,' 
Wesley  says,  *  is  spiritual  adultery.'  The  Evangelicals 
were  not  as  consistent  and  thoroughgoing  as  their  mediaeval 
prototjTpes  ;  they  did  not  advocate  retirement  from  the 
world  and  seclusion  in  a  monastery.  But  they  denounced 
many  of  the  ordinary  pursuits  and  pleasures  of  society, 
commonly  looked  upon  as  indifferent  matters,  and  in- 
sisted that  they  ought  to  be  eschewed  by  the  Christian. 
Card-playing,  dancing,  gaming,  horse-racing,  theatre- 
going,  elaborate  dressing,  and  frivolity  of  all  kinds  came 
in  for  most  vigorous  condemnation.  To  be  a  Christian 
very  commonly  meant  above  all  to  turn  one's  back 
upon  such  employments.  Thus  there  grew  up  an  ex- 
ternality of  religion  and  an  artificiality  of  practice  even 
more  complete  than  anything  witnessed  in  mediaeval 
Catholicism. 

The  same  interest  in  the  unworldly  character  of  the 
Christian  life  led  V\^esley  to  advocate  brealviiig  with  one's 
worldly  acquaintances  upon  becoming  a  Christian.^     Evil 

1  Cf.  e.g.  his  sermon  entitled  '  In  what  sense  we  are  to  leave  the  world,' 
Wos-ks,  vol.  vii.  p.  5  sg^.,  especially  p.  12. 


IX.]  PIETISM  169 

is  contagious,  and  such  acquaintances  are  bound  to  have  a 
bad  influence  and  keep  the  convert  from  Hving  the  new 
and  higher  hfe.  Apparently  he  forgot  the  good  that  the 
Christian  might  do  his  worldly  companion  in  thinking  of 
the  evil  he  would  suffer  from  him.  At  the  same  time 
he  did  not  overlook  responsibility  for  the  welfare  of  one's 
fellows.  Indeed,  he  made  love  and  service  of  others  an 
important  part  of  Christian  virtue.  And  following  him 
the  evangelical  party  gave  itself  to  humanitarian  and 
social  labour  on  a  large  scale,  and  with  great  effectiveness. 
They  were  not  alone  in  this,  to  be  sure ;  they  were  at  one 
with  the  spirit  of  the  century.  But  it  meant  much  for 
the  future  that  not  rationalists  and  deists  and  unbelievers 
alone  were  fired  with  a  new  enthusiasm  for  humanity,  but 
that  the  great  representatives  of  a  revived  Christianity 
shared  the  same  sj)irit. 

Reference  has  been  made  to  Wesley's  insistence  upon 
the  presence  and  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  both  at  the 
beginning  and  throughout  the  Christian  life.  It  was 
inevitable  in  view  of  this  that  feeling  should  come  to  play 
a  large  part  in  evangelical  piety.  If  a  man  is  truly  regener- 
ate, he  ought  to  retain  the  memory  of  the  experience 
through  which  he  passed  at  the  time  of  his  conversion, 
and  he  ought  to  be  vividly  conscious  of  the  Spirit's  control 
in  all  his  activities.  His  should  be  the  joy,  the  comfort, 
the  inspiration  of  the  realisation  of  the  divine  presence. 
If  such  emotions  are  lacking,  if  his  heart  is  cold,  and  his 
life  governed  by  the  mere  dictates  of  reason,  he  may  well 
doubt  whether  he  is  indeed  regenerate,  for  the  influence 
of  the  Spirit  cannot  do  otherwise  than  lift  him  out  of  him- 
self and  above  himself  in  a  new  devotion  and  enthusiasm. 
The  religious  man,  according  to  the  Evangelicals,  is  not 
one  who  does  his  duty  recognising  it  as  God's  will,  as  the 
rationalist  said,  but  one  who  has  had  a  vivid  religious 
experience  and  enjoys  continually  a  consciousness  of  the 
divine.     The  situation  is  the  same  as  in  pietism  in  general, 


170  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOEE  KANT         [en 

and  the  contrast  with  rationaHsm  is  as  great  as  with 
scholasticism.  Both  in  England  and  in  Germany  the 
change  of  emphasis  was  prophetic  of  a  revolution  to  follow 
with  the  dawning  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

The  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  according  to  Wesley, 
had  intellectual  as  well  as  practical  and  emotional  effects. 
It  meant,  not  simply  new  feelings  and  a  new  power  to  do 
right,  but  also  the  ability  to  know  and  understand  religious 
truth.  *  Every  good  gift  is  from  God,  and  is  given  to  man 
by  the  Holy  Ghost.  By  nature  there  is  in  us  no  good 
thing.  And  there  can  be  none  ;  but  so  far  as  it  is  wrought 
in  us  by  that  good  Spirit.  Have  we  any  true  knowledge 
of  what  is  good  ?  This  is  not  the  result  of  our  natural 
understanding.  The  natural  man  discemeth  not  the 
things  of  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  so  that  we  can  never  discern 
them  until  God  reveals  them  unto  us  by  His  Spirit.'  ^ 

Consistently  with  this  notion  of  present-day  revelation 
Wesley  taught  that  the  Christian  possesses  an  organ  of 
spiritual  knowledge  by  which  he  is  enabled  to  apprehend 
the  truth  shown  him  by  the  Spirit.  This  organ  is  faith. 
It  is  a  faculty  of  direct  vision  by  which  spiritual  realities 
are  perceived  as  immediately  as  physical  realities  by  the 
bodily  senses.  *  Faith  is  that  divine  evidence  whereby 
the  spiritual  man  discerneth  God  and  the  things  of  God. 
It  is  with  respect  to  the  spiritual  world  what  sense  is  to 
the  natural.  It  is  the  spiritual  sensation  of  every  soul 
that  is  bom  of  God.'  ^  *  And  seeing  our  ideas  are  not  innate, 
but  must  all  originally  come  from  our  senses,^  it  is  cer- 
tainly necessary  that  you  have  senses  capable  of  discerning 
objects  of  this  kind.  Not  only  those  which  are  called 
natural  senses,  which  in  this  respect  profit  nothing,  as 
being   altogether   incapable   of   discerning   objects   of   a 

1  Works,  vol.  viii.  p.  264. 

*  *  An  Earnest  Appeal  to  Men  of  Reason  and  Religion,'  Works,  vol.  viii. 
p.  188. 

»  It  is  interesting  to  see  the  use  to  which  Wesley  here  puts  Locke'i 
dictum. 


dl]  pietism  171 

spiritual  kind,  but  spiritual  senses,  exercised  to  discern 
spiritual  good  and  evil.  It  is  necessary  that  you  have  the 
hearing  ear,  and  the  seeing  eye,  emphatically  so-called  ; 
that  you  have  a  new  class  of  senses  opened  in  your  soul, 
not  depending  on  organs  of  flesh  and  blood,  to  be  the 
evidence  of  things  not  seen,  as  your  bodily  senses  are  of 
visible  things ;  to  be  the  avenues  to  the  invisible  world, 
to  discern  spiritual  objects,  and  to  furnish  you  with  ideas 
of  what  the  outward  "  eye  hath  not  seen,  neither  the  ear 
heard."  And  till  you  have  these  internal  senses,  till  the 
eyes  of  your  understanding  are  opened,  you  can  have  no 
proper  apprehension  of  divine  things,  no  just  idea  of  them. 
Nor  consequently  till  then  can  you  either  judge  truly,  or 
reason  justly  concerning  them  ;  seeing  your  reason  has  no 
ground  whereon  to  stand,  no  materials  to  work  upon.'  ^ 
The  contrast  between  this  idea  of  faith  and  the  current 
idea  of  Wesley's  day  is  very  striking.  To  one  who  has 
such  a  spiritual  sense  as  this  all  proof  of  divine  things  is 
superfluous.  One's  faith  does  not  rest  upon  argument, 
but  upon  direct  vision,  and  the  whole  rational  apologetic  ^ 
becomes  at  a  single  stroke  unnecessary  and  abortive.  It 
is  true  that  Wesley  was  not  consistent  at  this  point.  He 
left  the  old  scheme  standing,  and  even  appealed  to  it  on 
occasion,  to  the  confusion  of  the  situation  and  the  detri- 
ment of  his  own  principles.  But  this  fact,  while  it  had 
very  unfortunate  consequences,  should  not  blind  us  to 
the  real  significance  of  the  evangelical  position.  Here,  too, 
there  was  the  prophecy  of  a  new  age. 

The  evangelical  emphasis  on  the  immediate  presence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  suggests  a  very  different  idea  of  God 
from  that  held  by  the  rational  school  of  Wesley's  day. 
According  to  that  school,  God  was  transcendent,  and  no 
one  could  come  into  direct  contact  or  immediate  com- 
munion with  Him.  At  the  same  time,  it  will  not  do  to  say 
that  Wesley  and  the  Evangelicals  taught  the  immanence 

1  Works,  vol.  viii.  p.  195.  *  See  the  next  chapter. 


172  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

of  God  in  any  strict  sense.  They  emphasised  the  im- 
mediate presence  of  the  Spirit  in  the  hearts  and  Uves  of 
behevers,  but  to  nature  and  humanity  in  general  they 
denied  divinity  in  the  most  emphatic  terms.  Only  one 
possessed  of  saving  faith  enjoys  the  divine  indwelling. 
The  idea  of  a  present  Si)irit  might  mean  a  step,  but  it  was 
only  a  step,  in  the  direction  of  the  modern  doctrine  of 
divine  immanence,  and  its  significance  should  not  be  ex- 
aggerated. As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  strongest  opponents 
of  that  doctrine  in  more  recent  days  have  been  convinced 
and  thoroughgoing  Evangelicals. 

It  would  seem  as  if  their  emphasis  upon  the  Spirit, 
revealing  divine  truth  as  well  as  imparting  moral  power, 
would  have  led  the  Evangelicals  to  give  up  all  notion  of 
an  external  authority  in  religion,  but  their  distrust  of 
man  was  so  great,  and  their  hostility  to  the  rationalism 
of  the  age  so  controlling  that  they  took  exactly  the  op- 
posite course.  The  authority  of  the  Bible  was  made 
more  of  by  them  than  for  a  long  time  before.  In  opposition 
to  the  current  recognition  of  the  sufficiency  of  human 
reason,  they  delighted  to  belittle  it,  and  to  denounce  its 
claims  as  presumptuous  and  irreligious.  But  they  appealed 
in  opposition  to  it,  not  to  the  Spirit  in  the  hearts  of  all 
believers,  as  the  Quakers  did,  but  to  the  written  and  in- 
fallible word.  It  is  due  to  evangelical  influence,  and  not 
to  scholasticism  or  the  Protestantism  of  the  Reformation 
period  that  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures  has  meant  so 
much  to  English  and  American  Christians  of  modem  times. 
In  German  pietism  the  Bible  was  employed  chiefly  as  a 
devotional  book.  But  in  evangelicalism  its  significance 
as  a  divine  revelation,  authenticating  the  orthodox  faith 
over  against  deism  and  scepticism,  became  especially 
prominent.  Interpreted  evangelically,  it  was  made  a 
doctrinal  and  moral  authority  of  the  most  binding  char- 
acter. To  venture  to  criticise  its  statements,  to  question 
its  authority,  to  raise  doubts  as  to  the  authenticity  of  any 


IX.]  PIETISM  173 

part,  to  set  one's  own  judgment  above  it,  to  treat  it  as  in 
any  way  ill-adapted  to  present  conditions,  all  this  was 
intolerable  to  a  genuine  Evangelical.  Reverence  for  it 
was  carried  so  far  that  magical  value  was  attached  to  the 
volume  itself.  To  have  it  upon  one's  person  was  a  safe- 
guard, to  open  it  at  random  in  times  of  indecision,  and  to 
be  guided  by  the  words  that  first  met  the  eye,  was  the  course 
of  a  true  believer.  It  is  interesting  to  notice  in  this  con- 
nection Wesley's  attitude  toward  the  modern  view  of  the 
universe.  He  refused  to  accept  the  Copernican  astronomy 
on  the  ground  that  it  contradicted  Scripture.  He  believed 
in  witchcraft  on  Biblical  authority,  and  interpreted 
natural  calamities,  such  as  the  Lisbon  earthquake,  as 
direct  visitations  of  God.  In  fact,  in  his  supernaturalism 
and  in  his  recognition  of  an  external  authority  to  which 
all  conclusions  about  the  physical  universe  should  be 
made  to  conform,  he  was  a  genuine  medisevalist,  although 
his  life  fell  wholly  within  the  eighteenth  century,  the 
century  of  enlightenment.  It  is  not  meant  to  imply  that 
evangelicalism  is  necessarily  one  with  Wesley  in  these 
matters,  that  it  involves  the  rejection  of  the  conclusions 
of  modern  science  and  the  retention  of  the  mediseval 
world-view.  But  Wesley's  attitude  was  significant  never- 
theless. It  was  simply  an  extreme  expression  of  the 
common  evangelical  belief  touching  the  authority  of  the 
Scriptures  and  of  the  common  evangelical  distrust  of  the 
powers  of  the  natural  man. 

Evangelical  emphasis  upon  the  corruptness  and  inability 
of  man  was  more  in  line  with  historic  Calvinism  than 
historic  Arminianism.  And  yet,  curiously  enough,  Wesley 
himself  was  an  Arminian.  This  was  because  he  was 
brought  up  in  high  church  circles  where  Arminian  views 
had  long  been  popular;  and  William  Law,  whose  in- 
fluence was  so  dominant  in  the  early  part  of  his  career, 
represented  the  same  tj^pe  of  thought.  The  Arminianism 
of  the  high  church  party,  which  Wesley  inherited,  was  not 


174  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

the  fruit  of  liberalism  or  rationalism.  It  was  due  in  part 
to  hostility  to  Puritanism,  which  was  emphatically  Calvin- 
istic,  in  part  to  paramount  interest  in  the  church  and 
sacraments  as  means  of  grace.  The  significance  of  both 
seemed  better  conserved  by  a  doctrine  which  left  some 
share  to  man  in  working  out  his  own  salvation.  This  kind 
of  Arminianism  was  in  reality  as  conservative  and  as 
much  out  of  line  with  rationalistic  tendencies  as  Calvinism 
itself.  Neither  the  one  nor  the  other  recognised  any 
merit  in  the  natural  man,  or  any  power  to  save  himself 
without  divine  aid.  It  is  therefore  not  surprising  that 
when  the  practical  revival  interest  laid  hold  on  Wesley 
it  should  express  itself  in  Arminian  form.  As  a  matter 
of  fact  it  always  proved  impossible  for  him  to  put  himself 
at  the  Calvinistic  point  of  view,  and  to  appreciate  the 
moral  incentive  of  the  doctrine  of  absolute  divine  sover- 
eignty. It  seemed  to  him  that  Calvinism  must  deprive 
a  man  of  the  needed  stimulus,  and  promote  indifference 
and  sloth.  Thus  Wesley's  Arminianism  was  not  an  in- 
consistency as  it  is  often  represented.  Nevertheless  his 
strong  emphasis  upon  the  Fall  and  resulting  depravity 
was  more  akin  to  historic  Calvinism  than  to  a  system  which 
arose  in  opposition  to  it,  and  which  in  its  inception  felt, 
though  ever  so  slightly,  the  influence  of  the  modern  inter- 
est in  the  ability  and  worth  of  man.  Under  these  circum- 
stances, it  is  not  surprising  that  the  Calvinist  Whitefield 
regarded  Wesley's  Arminian  views  as  extremely  danger- 
ous, and  that  the  two  men  fell  mto  open  and  bitter  contro- 
versy. But  it  is  an  interesting  commentary  upon  the 
gospel's  indifference  to  philosophy  and  theology  that  men 
representing,  however  crudely  and  inconsistently,  two 
radically  diverse  types  of  thought  should  both  accomplish 
so  tremendous  practical  results.  Ever  since  the  time  of 
Wesley  and  Whitefield  there  has  been  both  Arminian  and 
Calvinistic  evangelicalism,  but  the  underlying  interest  of 
the  two  types  has  been  essentially  the  same,  and  their 


IS.]  PIETISM  175 

differences  superficial  and  unimportant,   in  spite  of  the 
large  prominence  that  has  been  given  them. 

The  effects  of  evangehcahsm  on  EngUsh  reHgious  hfe 
and  thought  are  easy  to  constitute,  comphcated  though 
they  are.  It  put  an  end  to  the  barren  rationahsm  of  the 
eighteenth  century  ;  it  substituted  immediate  experience 
for  ratiocination,  direct  knoA^ledge  for  indirect,  in  the 
religious  sphere,  and  so  circumvented  the  sceptics  whom 
the  apologists  were  impotent  to  overcome  ;  it  brought 
the  feelings  once  more  into  repute,  and  aided  the  nine- 
teenth-century reaction  against  the  narrow  intellectual- 
ism  of  the  eighteenth  ;  it  gave  a  new  meaning  and  an 
independent  value  to  rehgion  ;  it  promoted  iadividualism 
and  emancipation  from  the  bondage  of  ecclesiasticism  ; 
and,  above  all,  it  vitalised  and  revived  rehgion  throughout 
the  length  and  breadth  of  the  land.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  brought  back  much  of  the  old  system,  including  many 
of  its  most  obnoxious  features  which  rationalism  had 
relegated  to  oblivion,  as  it  supposed,  for  ever.  It  turned 
its  face  deliberately  toward  the  past  instead  of  toward  the 
future  in  its  interpretation  of  man  and  his  need.  It 
sharpened  the  issue  between  Christianity  and  the  modern 
age,  and  promoted  the  notion  that  the  faith  of  the  fathers 
had  no  message  for  their  children.  Becoming  identified 
in  the  minds  of  many  with  Christianity,  its  narroTVTiess 
and  medisevalism,  its  emotionahsm  and  lack  of  intellectu- 
ality, its  crass  supernaturalism  and  Biblical  literahsm, 
its  want  of  sympathy  with  art  and  science  and  secular 
culture  in  general,  turned  them  permanently  against 
religion.  In  spite  of  the  great  work  accomplished  by 
evangelicalism,  the  result  in  many  quarters  was  disaster. 

in.  The  New  England  Theology 

Closely  related  to  English  evangehcalism,  though  of 
independent  origin,  was  the  New  England  theology  of  the 


176  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KAN  1  [ch. 

Edwardean  School.  Like  evangelicalism,  it  was  a  reaction 
not  only  against  religious  indifference,  but  also  against 
rationalism  and  unbelief.  It  is  true  that  there  is  very 
little  direct  evidence  of  theological  radicalism  in  the 
American  literature  of  the  early  eighteenth  century,  but 
the  attitude  of  Jonathan  Edwards  shows  that  there  was 
more  of  it  than  now  appears.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
in  his  active  polemic  against  English  hberals  such  as  the 
Arminian  Taylor,  he  was  really  striving  to  refute  hke  views 
among  his  countrymen.  On  the  other  hand,  the  fact  that 
he  is  silent  about  the  writings  of  the  Deists,  and  nowhere 
enters  into  discussion  with  them,  though  he  Hved  while 
the  deistic  controversy  was  at  its  height,  makes  it  plain 
that  their  influence  was  not  as  yet  widely  felt  by  his 
countrymen,  and  that  there  was  no  occasion  for  alarm  on 
their  account. 

The  incipient  liberalism  of  the  day,  which  took  the  form 
of  a  more  or  less  distinct  Arminianism,  was  in  line  with  the 
modern  spirit,  and  was  out  of  sympathy  with  the  traditional 
estimate  of  man  and  the  traditional  emphasis  upon  his 
depravity  and  helplessness.  It  was  this  feature  of  it  which 
was  most  dangerous  in  Edwards'  eyes,  and  in  meeting  it 
he  set  forth  the  opposite  principle  in  the  extremest  possible 
form.  New  England  was  traditionally  Calvinistic,  and 
Calvinism  offered  the  greatest  contrast  to  the  growing 
liberahsm  of  the  day.  In  it  Edwards  found  the  best 
means  of  opposing  the  new  tendencies,  and  transformed 
the  somewhat  mild  type  of  it  prevalent  in  his  day  into  the 
most  rigid  and  uncompromising  system  the  world  has 
seen.  His  Calvinism  was  the  least  scholastic  and  the  most 
profound,  both  philosophically  and  religiously,  to  be  found 
in  any  school.  His  practical  interest  throughout  was  to 
humble  man,  to  convince  him  of  his  total  depravity  and 
absolute  bondage  to  sin,  and  so  startle  him  out  of  his  easy 
indifference  and  complacent  self-confidence.  The  doctrine 
of  unconditional  predestination  was  but  a  corollary.     It 


12..]  PIETISM  177 

was  not  the  greatness  of  God,  but  the  nothingness  of  man 
that  he  was  primarily  interested  to  enforce,  and  all  his 
theology  was  dominated  by  this  aim.  He  was  a  great 
philosophical  thinker,  and  he  might  have  made  important 
contributions  to  metaphysics  had  he  continued  the  specu- 
lations recorded  in  his  early  Notes  on  the  Mind ;  but  he 
preferred  to  give  himself  to  religious  work,  and  all  his 
writings,  profound  and  abstruse  as  many  of  them  are, 
were  produced  with  the  practical  purpose  of  illustrating 
and  enforcing  the  truth  of  man's  complete  dependence 
upon  God. 

As  a  result  of  his  preaching,  the  revival  in  Northampton, 
out  t>f  which  the  Great  Awakening  grew,  had  already  begun 
before  Whitefield  appeared  upon  the  scene,  and  even  be- 
fore the  evangelical  revival  started  in  England,  but  its 
kinship  with  the  contemporary  English  movement  is  sho\^Ti 
by  the  ease  with  which  Whitefield  found  himself  at  home 
in  it.i  If  later  there  was  division  and  estrangement,  it  was 
due,  not  to  any  essential  difference  of  principle,  but  to  the 
sensationalism  of  the  English  evangelist's  methods  and 
the  censoriousness  of  his  temper.  It  is  true  that  the 
preaching  of  the  English  Evangelicals,  including  White- 
field,  was  commonly  different  from  that  of  Edwards. 
While  they  laid  the  stress  upon  the  love  of  God,  he  chiefly 
emphasised  His  wrath.  But  he  aimed  to  secure  the  same 
results  by  driving  man  to  despair,  which  they  achieved 
by  encouraging  him  to  hope.  Upon  the  fundamental 
importance  of  the  doctrine  of  original  sin,  and  upon  the 
resulting  depravity  of  man,  and  his  utter  inabihty  to  save 
himself,  they  were  all  agreed.  They  were  at  one  also  in 
emphasising  the  supernatural  and  cataclysmic  character 
of  conversion,  in  drawing  the  sharpest  possible  contrast 
between   the   regenerate   and    unregenerate,    in   insisting 

1  On  the  revival  see  Edwards's  Narrative  of  Surprising  Conversions,  Dis- 
txnguishmg  Marks  of  a  Work  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  Thoughts  on  the  RevvoaZ, 
and  his  masterly  Treatise  on  the  Religious  Affections. 

M 


173  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

upon  the  other-worldliness  of  the  Christian  hfe,  in  giving 
love  a  supreme  place  in  Christian  virtue,  in  recognising  a 
new  spiritual  sense  or  taste  received  in  regeneration,  and 
in  bowing  loyally  to  the  absolute  authority  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. Thus  we  have  in  Edwardeanism  a  parallel  to 
English  evangelicalism  in  spite  of  the  many  and  radical 
divergences ;  and  it  is  no  accident  that  in  America,  since 
the  eighteenth  century,  evangelicalism  has  spread,  not 
simply  within  the  Wesleyan  communions,  which  were  the 
direct  fruit  of  English  Methodism,  but  also  in  those  churches 
whose  antecedents  are  Edwardean  or  akin  thereto. 

But  Edwards  was  much  more  than  an  Evangelical,  and 
much  more,  too,  than  a  Calvinist,  though  it  is  his  Calvinism 
which  is  chiefly  remembered.  He  was  one  of  the  most 
profound  theologians  the  world  has  seen,  and  he  pos- 
sessed philosophical  gifts  of  a  high  order.  It  would  carry 
us  too  far  afield,  and  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  plan 
of  this  volume  to  discuss  his  teaching  in  detail,  but  cer- 
tain features  of  it  are  of  sufficient  interest  to  demand 
attention  even  though  their  influence  on  the  development 
of  Protestant  thought  has  been  slight.  Not  to  dwell 
upon  his  Notes  on  the  Mind,  in  which  a  thoroughgoing 
idealism  similar  to  but  not  identical  with  Berkeley's 
foiuid  expression,^  reference  may  be  made  particularly 
to  his  famous  treatise  on  the  will,  and  to  his  even  more 
remarkable  dissertations  on  The  End  for  which  God 
created  the  World  and  on  the  Nature  of  True  Virtue.  The 
treatise  on  the  will,^  the  most  celebrated  of  all  his  works, 
was  written  with  a  polemic  purpose — to  destroy  the  very 
foundations  upon  which  Arminianism  rested — and  the 
argument  employed   was   even  more   largely   theological 

1  Edwards's  idealism  was  essentially  a  form  of  mystical  pantheism,  and 
•whether  he  owed  the  suggestion  of  it  to  Berkeley  or  to  some  one  else,  at  any 
rate  it  gained  a  peculiar  colour  from  his  own  religious  temperament  and 
experience. 

2  A  Careful  and  Strict  Inquiry  into  the  Prevailing  Notions  of  the  Freedom 
of  the  Will,  published  in  176-4. 


IX.]  PIETISM  17S 

than  philosophical.  At  the  same  time  the  work  displays 
extraordinary  subtlety  and  dialectical  skill,  and  a  fearless- 
ness in  following  the  logic  of  one's  position  seldom  equalled 
before  or  since.  It  maintains  a  complete  necessitarianism. 
Men  are  free  in  so  far  as  they  possess  the  power  of  doing 
as  they  choose,  but  their  choices  are  absolutely  determined. 
This  is  not  due  to  divine  enactment,  or  to  the  fall  of  Adam 
bringing  man  into  bondage  ;  it  lies  in  the  very  nature  of 
the  will  itself,  which  is  always  controlled  by  motives, 
whether  in  man  or  God.  Adam  from  the  moment  of  his 
creation  Tvas  in  the  same  case  as  all  his  posterity  in  this 
respect,  though  the  motives  that  controlled  him  were 
different  in  his  primitive  state  of  innocence  and  in  his 
later  state  of  sin.  Edwards's  independence  of  theological 
tradition,  and  his  consistency  in  the  application  of  his 
principles  appear  particularly  in  this  departure  from  the 
common  Calvinistic  view. 

The  work  is  an  argument,  not  a  scientific  treatise.  Its 
chief  historic  significance  consists  in  its  exposure  of  the 
theological  weakness  of  the  current  Arminianism  of  the 
day,  and  such  originality  as  it  possesses  lies  only  in  tho 
persistence  and  pertinacity  with  which  the  subject  is 
pursued  into  all  its  ramifications. 

Of  a  very  different  character  and  philosophically  more 
profound  and  important  are  the  dissertations  on  The  End 
for  which  God  created  the  World,  and  on  the  Nature  of 
True  Virtue,  both  of  which  were  written  in  1755,  but  not 
published  until  after  Edwards's  death. 

In  the  former  there  reappears  the  mystic  pantheism  of 
his  youthful  Notes  on  the  Mind,  of  which  few  traces  are  to 
be  found  in  his  sermons  and  polemic  writings  of  interven- 
ing j^ears.  Infinite  being  has  a  natural  tendency  to 
diffuse  itself,  and  in  this  is  to  be  seen  the  end  of  creation. 
*  Thus  it  appears  reasonable  to  suppose,  that  it  was  what 
God  had  respect  to  as  an  ultimate  end  of  His  creating  the 
world,  to  communicate  of  His  ov^n  infinite  fullness  of  good ; 


180  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

or  rather  it  was  His  last  end,  that  there  might  be  a  glorious 
and  abundant  emanation  of  His  infinite  fullness  of  good  ad 
extra,  or  without  Himself ;  and  the  disposition  to  communi- 
cate Himself,  or  diffuse  his  own  Fullness,  which  we  must 
conceive  of  as  being  originally  in  God  as  a  perfection  of 
His  nature  was  what  moved  Him  to  create  the  world. 
But  here,  as  much  as  possible  to  avoid  confusion,  I  observe 
that  there  is  some  impropriety  in  saying  that  a  disposition 
in  God  to  communicate  Himself  to  the  creature  moved  Him 
to  create  the  world.  For  though  the  diffusive  disposition 
in  the  nature  of  God,  that  moved  Him  to  create  the  world, 
doubtless  inclines  Him  to  communicate  Himself  to  the 
creature,  when  the  creature  exists  ;  yet  this  cannot  be  all : 
because  an  inclination  in  God  to  communicate  Himself  to 
an  object,  seems  to  presuppose  the  existence  of  the  object, 
at  least  in  idea.  But  the  diffusive  disposition  that  excited 
God  to  give  creatures  existence,  was  rather  a  communi- 
cative disposition  in  general,  or  a  disposition  in  the  fullness 
of  the  divinity  to  flow  out  and  diffuse  itself.  Thus  the 
disposition  there  is  in  the  root  and  stock  of  a  tree  to  diffuse 
and  send  forth  its  sap  and  life,  is  doubtless  the  reason  of 
the  communication  of  its  sap  and  life  to  its  buds,  leaves, 
and  fruits,  after  these  exist.  But  a  disposition  to  communi- 
cate of  its  life  and  sap  to  its  fruits,  is  not  so  properly  the 
cause  of  its  producing  those  fruits,  as  its  disposition  to 
communicate  itself,  or  diffuse  its  sap  and  life  in  general. 
Therefore,  to  speak  more  strictly  according  to  truth,  we 
may  suppose,  that  a  disposition  in  God,  as  an  original 
property  of  His  nature,  to  an  emanation  of  His  own  infinite 
fullness,  was  what  excited  Him  to  create  the  world;  and  so 
that  the  emanation  itself  was  aimed  at  by  Him  as  a  last  end 
of  the  creation.^  ^ 

The  universe  is  not  a  creation  out  of  nothing,  but  an 
emanation  from  God.    It  has  real  existence  only  in  so  far 

1  Worcester  edition  of  Edwards's  Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  206  fq.     The  italics 
are  his. 


IX.]  PIETISM  181 

as  it  partakes  of  God.  God  is  interested  in  it,  not  for  its 
own  sake,  but  because  He  is  Himself  infused  in  it.  His 
last  end  in  creation  is  Himself.  He  loves  Himself 
supremely,  for  He  is  supreme  excellence  and  alone  worthy 
to  be  the  object  of  such  love.  The  w^orld  exists  for  God's 
glory,  and  the  happiness  and  well-being  of  the  creature 
are  only  of  subordinate  and  secondary  concern.  Inde- 
pendently of  God  the  creature  has  no  significance.  But 
possessing  as  he  does  somewhat  of  the  divine  nature  he 
shares  in  the  blessedness  of  God,  and  is  advantaged  by  the 
promotion  of  the  divine  glory.  A  considerable  part  of 
the  work  is  taken  up  with  a  discussion  of  the  meaning  of 
the  glory  of  God,  which  all  Calvinists  agreed  was  the  end 
of  creation,  and  it  is  found  to  consist  in  the  diffusion  of 
His  fullness,  and  not  simply  in  the  exhibition  of  His  attri- 
butes, as  had  commonly  been  said. 

The  general  contention  of  Edwards's  dissertation  is 
stated  with  abundant  emphasis  and  clearness,  but  the 
argument  is  beset  with  a  fundamental  difficulty  which  his 
theological  and  practical  interest  made  it  impossible  for 
him  to  surmount.  The  result  is  ambiguity  and  confusion. 
His  position  is  essentially  pantheistic.  The  universe  is 
conceived  as  an  emanation  from  God,  possessing  reahty 
only  as  it  partakes  of  the  divine  nature,  and  yet  the  neces- 
sities of  practical  religion  require  him  to  give  some  measure 
at  least  of  independent  existence  to  human  souls.  He 
does  not  succeed  in  extricating  himself  from  this  difficulty. 
Indeed,  while  he  evidently  feels  it,  he  does  not  grapple 
with  it  at  all.  As  a  consequence  the  essay  is  very  un- 
satisfactory as  a  discussion  of  God's  relation  to  the  world, 
but  it  is  profound  and  suggestive  and  strikingly  unlike 
traditional  Calvinistic  treatments  of  the  subject  from 
Calvin  himself  down.  That  Deity  was  viewed  under  the 
aspect  of  infinite  being  rather  than  almighty  will  carried 
the  whole  matter  into  another  sphere.  It  was  inevitable 
that  inconsistencies  should  emerge.     They  were  similar 


182  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOKE  KANT         [ch. 

to  those  which  beset  Augustine,  who  also  felt  as  Edwards 
did  the  diverse  influence  of  Neo-Platonic  metaphysics 
and  practical  Christianity.  The  essay,  both  in  its  con- 
trolling contention  and  in  its  radical  inconsistency,  is  one 
of  the  most  significant  and  prophetic  in  the  whole  range 
of  modern  theological  literature. 

Equally  profound  and  suggestive,  and  of  more  immediate 
influence  was  the  parallel  dissertation  on  the  Nature  of 
True  Virtue.  Edwards's  general  attitude  and  his  philo- 
sophical assumptions  are  the  same  in  both  dissertations, 
and  the  two  are  very  closely  related  in  spite  of  the  difference 
of  theme.  In  genuine  Neo-Platonic  fashion  he  regards 
being  itself  as  a  good,  and  he  goes  on  to  draw  the  conclu- 
sion that  excellence  is  proportioned  to  the  degree  of  exist- 
ence. The  more  of  existence  any  being  has,  other  things 
being  equal,  the  more  excellent  it  is.  The  infinite  Being 
God  is  immeasurably  more  excellent  than  all  creatures, 
for  He  possesses  an  infinitely  greater  amount  of  existence 
than  they,  and  is  infinitely  farther  from  nonentity.  Virtue, 
in  accordance  with  the  common  opinion  of  his  day,  Edwards 
defines  as  benevolence.  Consent  to,  good-will  toward,  or 
pleasure  in  being — this  is  what  benevolence  means,  and  it 
is  in  this  that  virtue  consists.  It  is  not  in  the  benevolent 
attitude  or  emotion  as  such,  nor  in  the  acts  to  which  it 
leads  that  Edwards  finds  virtue,  but  in  the  due  proportion 
between  benevolence  and  its  object.  To  love  a  being 
more  than  he  deserves  violates  harmony  as  truly  as  to 
love  him  less  than  he  deserves,  and  lack  of  harmony  means 
lack  of  virtue.  Universal  being  is  a  system,  and  each  part 
of  it  is  excellent  only  in  so  far  as  it  is  in  harmony  with  the 
wnole.  Virtue  is  to  be  defined  as  consent  to,  or  harmony 
with,  or  love  for  Being  in  general,  that  is  intelligent  Being. 
But  Being  in  general  Edwards  identifies  with  God,  the 
infinite  by  whose  communication  or  diffusion  of  Himself 
all  that  is  exists.  True  virtue,  therefore,  consists  in  love 
for  the  infinite  Being  God.     Benevolence  toward  Being 


IX.J  PIETISM  183 

in  general  means  benevolence  toward  G  jd,  that  is  supreme 
delight  in  His  happiness  and  the  controlling  desire  to  pro- 
mote His  glory.  Toward  all  other  beings  virtue  involves 
benevolence  in  the  degree  to  which  they  possess  existence, 
or,  in  other  words,  in  the  degree  to  which  they  partake  of 
God.  To  love  any  creature — whether  oneself  or  another — 
independently  of  God,  or  in  greater  degree  than  its  scale 
of  being  warrants  is  wrong — wrong  in  God  as  well  as  in 
man.  The  evil  of  self-love  is  due,  not  to  its  selfishness, 
but  to  the  fact  that  it  accords  to  a  creature  a  disproportion- 
ate amount  of  affection.  Undue  affection  for  another  is 
as  bad  as  undue  affection  for  oneself ;  only  in  subordina- 
tion to  love  for  God,  or  Being  iq  general,  is  love  for  a  creature 
justified.  God's  holiness  consists  in  a  supreme  regard  for 
Himself.  That  it  is  self-love  does  not  make  it  less  holy, 
for  it  is  love  rightly  bestowed,  and  in  love  so  bestowed 
virtue  consists  and  in  nothiug  else.  God  is  to  be  supremely 
loved,  both  by  Himself  and  by  the  creature.  Men  are  to 
be  loved  only  in  subordination  to  Him  and  as  partakiug  of 
Him.  And  hence  love  for  the  non-elect,  who  in  reality  do 
not  share  at  all  in  the  divine  nature,  has  no  justification. 
*  The  first  object  of  a  virtuous  benevolence  is  Being,  simply 
considered  ;  and  if  Beiug,  simply  considered,  be  its  object, 
then  Beiug  in  general  is  its  object;  and  what  it  has  an 
ultimate  propensity  to,  is  the  highest  good  of  Being  in 
general.  And  it  will  seek  the  good  of  every  individual 
being  unless  it  be  conceived  as  not  consistent  with  the 
highest  good  of  being  in  general.  In  which  case  the  good 
of  a  particular  being,  or  some  beings,  may  be  given  up  for 
the  sake  of  the  highest  good  of  Being  in  general.  And 
particularly,  if  there  be  any  being  irreclaimably  opposite, 
and  an  enemy  to  Being  in  general,  then  consent  and  ad- 
herence to  Being  in  general  will  induce  the  truly  virtuous 
heart  to  forsake  that  enemy  and  to  oppose  it.'  ^ 
Love,  if  it  is  to  be  virtuous,  must  be  proportioned,  not 

1  Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  264. 


184  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

to  the  need,  but  to  the  excellence  of  the  object  loved. 
Holy  love  is  love  for  a  holy  object,  not  love  which  would 
make  the  unholy  holy.  Far  from  the  gospel  of  Christ, 
with  its  emphasis  upon  love  for  the  unlovely  and  unworthy, 
as  this  teaching  is,  religion  is  yet  given  a  place  of  funda- 
mental importance  that  has  seldom  been  accorded  to  it. 
Never,  in  fact,  have  religion  and  ethics  been  more  com- 
pletely fused. 

Edwards's  identification  of  God  at  once  with  being  in 
general,  and  with  the  personal  God  of  the  Hebrew  and 
Christian  revelation,  introduces  into  the  dissertation  on 
Virtue  an  inconsistency  similar  to  that  which  beset  the 
dissertation  on  God's  End  in  Creation.  It  is  an  ancient 
inconsistency,  troubling  theology  ever  since  the  time  of 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  but  it  becomes  more  acute  than 
ever  in  such  a  metaphysical  discussion  as  Edwards's.  The 
influence  of  tradition  and  the  interests  of  practical  religion 
prevented  him  here  too,  as  at  so  many  other  places,  from 
following  loyally  the  leading  of  his  speculative  genius. 

The  development  of  thought  within  the  Edwardean 
school  cannot  be  traced  here.  Edwards  was  the  only 
genius  of  the  school,  and  the  theologising  of  his  disciples 
had  for  the  most  part  but  local  and  passing  interest.  His 
theory  of  virtue,  although  it  was  not  the  subject  most 
discussed,  proved  the  most  fruitful  of  all  his  ideas.  It 
found  consistent,  even  if  paradoxical  utterance,  in  the 
*  willingness  to  be  damned  for  the  glory  of  God,'  upon 
which  Samuel  Hopkins,  his  greatest  disciple,  laid  emphasis. 
The  attitude  thus  expressed  was  ridiculed  by  many,  in- 
cluding even  Edwardeans,  but  they  thereby  only  betrayed 
their  lack  of  appreciation  of  the  profound  religiousness 
and  sublime  disinterestedness  of  Edwards's  teaching.  He 
was  a  rare  and  lofty  spirit  among  the  sons  of  men,  so 
enamoured  of  the  divine  from  the  time  he  penned  his 
youthful  Notes  on  the  Mind,  to  the  closing  years  of  his 
life,  when  he  wrote  his  dissertations  on  God's  End  in 


IX.]  PIETISM  185 

Creation  and  the  Nature  of  True  Virtue,  that  all  else- 
earth  and  self  and  fellow-men — seemed  but  'as  the  light 
dust  in  the  balance  (which  is  taken  no  notice  of  by  him 
that  weighs),  and  as  nothing  and  vanity.' 

We  have  been  carried  far  afield  from  evangelicalism  in 
this  consideration  of  Edwards's  theological  and  philo- 
sophical work,  but  he  remained  an  Evangelical  to  the  end, 
and  his  piety,  suffused  and  transfigured  though  it  was  by 
his  loftier  genius,  was  in  essence  that  of  Spener  and  Wesley, 
and  all  true  Pietists. 


186  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOEE  KANT  [ch. 


CHAPTER  X 

RATIONALISM 

The  Protestant  Reformation  was  mediaeval,  net  modern, 
in  its  spirit  and  interest,  and  the  Protestant  scholasticism 
of  the  seventeenth  century,  which  has  been  briefly  re- 
viewed, was  a  legitimate  outcome  of  it.  Bondage  to  an 
external  law  of  faith  and  practice  was  for  a  long  time  as 
complete  in  Protestantism  as  in  Catholicism,  and  the  one 
was  as  conservative  in  the  field  of  religious  thought  as  the 
other.  The  immediate  effect  of  the  modern  spirit,  when 
it  began  to  make  its  influence  felt  in  Christianity,  was  as 
destructive  of  the  new  Protestantism  as  of  the  old  Catholi- 
cism. This  is  seen  clearly  enough  in  Socinianism,  and  still 
more  clearly  in  the  rationalism  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
where  the  modern  spirit  first  found  large  expression  with- 
in the  religious  sphere.  The  rationalism  of  the  period 
was  of  aU  sorts  and  degrees,  but  in  every  phase  of  it 
there  was  the  tendency  to  reject  or  modify  the  mediaeval 
estimate  of  man.  Greater  intellectual  sufiiciency,  and 
commonly  greater  moral  ability  were  attributed  to  him 
than  traditional  theology  was  willing  to  grant.  Often  the 
deviation  from  orthodox  doctrine  was  slight,  often  very- 
great,  but  in  every  case  the  modern  spirit  was  influential, 
and  those  doctrines  which  were  based  on  the  theory  of  the 
depravity  and  helplessness  of  man  received  least  emphasis 
or  were  repudiated  altogether.  It  cannot  be  too  strongly 
emphasised  that  rationalism  was  at  bottom  as  much  of 
a   break   with   Protestantism   as   with   Catholicism.     Its 


X.]  RATIONALISM  187 

principles  were  not  Protestant,  but  involved  the  rejection 
of  Protestant  and  Catholic  principles  alike.  Against 
modern  views  of  every  kind,  Protestantism  set  itselt 
as  uncompromisingly  as  Catholicism.  That  rationalism 
ultimately  made  its  home  in  Protestantism  rather  than  in 
the  older  communion,  was  not  because  the  former  was  in 
principle  more  tolerant  of  divergent  views,  but  because 
the  divisions  within  the  Protestant  ranks  made  greater 
tolerance  a  necessity.  The  break  with  the  old  ecclesias- 
tical institution  and  the  rise  of  new  churches  independent 
of  it  and  of  each  other  facihtated  the  gradual  growth 
of  a  freedom  in  religious  thought  w^hich  could  not  have 
come  had  all  Christendom  remained  under  a  single  ecclesi- 
astical control ;  but  the  break  itself,  and  not  any  particular 
principles  leading  to  it,  made  the  new  liberty  possible.  In 
the  conflict  of  authorities  there  was  room  for  new  ideas 
to  grow  and  flourish. 

In  a  previous  chapter,  the  rationalistic  tendency  of 
Socinianism  was  spoken  of.  Its  rationalism  was  of  a  very 
mild  sort,  and  went  hand  in  hand  with  a  thoroughgoing 
supernaturalism.  But  the  combination  involved  an  un- 
stable equilibrium  which  could  not  last.  It  is  not  due  to 
Socinianism  alone  nor  even  chiefly  that  rationalism  of  a 
more  consistent  type  made  its  way  within  the  Protestant 
churches,  and  ultimately  acquired  a  preponderating  in- 
fluence. The  general  spirit  of  the  modern  age  was  re- 
sponsible for  the  phenomenon.  Socinianism  represented 
simply  an  early  and  very  limited  exhibition  of  tendencies 
which  later  became  prominent  and  worked  themselves  out 
in  a  much  more  extreme  form. 

Socinian  influence  may  be  directly  traced  to  some  degree 
in  Holland,  where  rationalistic  tendencies  were  widespread 
in  the  early  seventeenth  century,  and  whence  they  made 
their  way  to  England  to  find  there  a  development  which, 
in  course  of  time,  made  English  thought  dominant  through- 
out Northern  Europe.     Holland  was  the  home  of  free 


188  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFOEE  KANT  [ch. 

thought  in  the  seventeenth  century.  Thither  came 
Descartes,  and  there  he  laid  the  foundations  of  modern 
philosophical  rationalism ;  here  Spinoza  constructed  the 
greatest  of  all  rational  systems;  here  Pierre  Bayle 
published  his  famous  dictionary,  and  here  the  Arminians 
nearly  a  century  earlier  rose  in  revolt  against  the  dominant 
Calvinism  of  the  day. 

In  Arminianism  we  have  an  interesting  parallel  to 
Socinianism  which  throws  welcome  light  upon  the  con- 
trolling interest  of  the  earlier  movement.  The  Arminians 
rejected  its  principles,  and  yet  their  attack  upon  Calvinism 
was  due  to  a  similar  interest.  Indeed,  it  is  in  their  case 
even  more  manifest  than  in  the  case  of  the  Sociaians. 
Though  in  other  respects  entirely  orthodox,  Arminius 
and  his  fellow  Remonstrants  felt  the  irrationality  of  the 
traditional  doctrine  of  total  depravity  and  the  injustice 
of  the  Calvinistic  dogma  of  unconditional  election,  and 
attacked  them  both.  The  emphasis  which  they  laid  upon 
the  justice  of  God  is  instructive,  for  it  means  a  regard  for 
the  dignity  and  rights  of  man  not  felt  by  the  genuine 
mediaevalists  of  the  Reformation.  To  Calvin  as  to  Zwingli, 
man  is  a  creature  who  has  no  rights  over  against  God. 
The  Creator  may  do  as  He  pleases  with  His  own.  But  the 
spirit  of  the  modern  age,  with  its  new  estimate  of  man, 
was  out  of  sympathy  with  such  a  doctrine.  Man  is  not 
a  mere  cipher  whose  fate  is  of  no  importance;  he  is  a 
rational  being  who  may  demand  consideration  and  fair 
treatment  from  God.  To  the  Arminians,  the  uncondi- 
tional election  which  stood  in  the  forefront  of  the  Calvin- 
istic system,  seemed  utterly  indefensible,  and  against  it 
their  attack  was  levelled.  To  be  sure,  the  attack  was  a 
mild  one  and  lacked  the  effectiveness  of  a  thoroughgoing 
application  of  a  great  controlling  principle.  Instead  of 
asserting  in  unqualified  terms  the  natural  ability  of  man, 
and  rejecting  the  whole  system  based  upon  his  inability, 
the  Arminians  accepted  the  dogma  of  the  Fall  and  the 


x]  RATIONALISM  189 

consequent  need  of  divine  grace,  and  criticised  only  the 
assertion  that  predestination  is  unconditional  and  inde- 
pendent of  all  human  merit.  The  conflict  was  not  between 
the  avowed  and  consistent  representatives  of  two  opposite 
principles.  All  it  meant  was  that  the  consistent  appli- 
cation of  one  principle  was  subjected  to  criticism  by  those 
who  had  felt  the  influence  of  another,  without  at  all  under- 
standing the  latter's  significance  or  being  in  the  least 
prepared  to  follow  it  to  its  logical  conclusion.  The 
Calvinists  had  all  the  advantage  of  clearness  and  consist- 
ency on  their  side,  and  it  was  only  natural  that  they 
should  win  the  victory.  But,  as  with  Socinianism,  so 
with  Arminianism,  there  was  more  in  the  movement  than 
appeared  upon  the  surface.  The  Arminians  of  that  day, 
as  of  later  days,  might  not  go  beyond  the  half-way  position 
of  Arminius  himself,  and  might  retain  the  traditional 
system  in  all  its  main  points  unchanged,  but  there  was  in 
the  movement  the  promise  of  a  greater  break  to  come,  the 
prophecy  of  an  application  of  the  modern  principle  in  a  way 
to  overthrow  the  old  completely. 

I.  In  England 

In  England,  rationalistic  tendencies  began  to  make 
themselves  felt  in  the  seventeenth  century,  appearing  in 
all  sorts  of  forms  and  in  various  degrees.  There  was  not 
an  orderly  progression  from  more  moderate  to  more  ex- 
treme views,  for  the  deism  of  Lord  Herbert  of  Cherbury 
and  the  materialism  of  Hobbes  antedated  considerably 
the  milder  supernatural  rationalism  of  such  men  as  Locke, 
Tillotson,  and  Clarke.  But  this  is  not  surprising.  The 
tendency  was  the  same  in  all  of  them,  but  as  is  commonly 
the  case,  it  found  much  more  consistent  and  extreme 
expression  in  some  than  in  others. 

During  the  greater  part  of  the  century,  controversy 
ran  high,  and  the  whole  country  was  torn  with  religious 


190  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

dissension.  A  natural  consequence  was  the  gradual 
growth  of  a  desire  to  find  some  common  platform  upon 
which  all  religious  men  could  stand  together  regardless 
of  their  theological  and  ecclesiastical  differences.  Among 
the  most  important  of  the  attempts  in  this  direction  was 
that  of  Lord  Herbert.  In  his  famous  work,  De  Veritate, 
pubhshed  in  1624,  he  set  up  common  consent  as  the 
principal  test  of  truth,  and  applying  the  criterion  in  the 
religious  sphere,  distinguished  a  natural  religion  shared 
by  wise  men  of  all  ages  and  races,  from  the  various  positive 
faiths  which  had  added  many  unessential  tenets,  obscuring 
the  great  and  vital  truths,  and  introducing  religious 
dissension  where  there  should  have  been  universal  harmony. 
Among  other  notable  writings  contributing  to  the  growth 
of  religious  tolerance  was  Chilling  worth's  Religion  of 
Protestants,  A  Sure  Way  to  Salvation  (1637),  in  which  the 
Scriptures  were  made  an  all-sufficient  guide,  and  differ- 
ences among  Christians  in  matters  not  defined  by  the 
Bible  were  minimised.  The  main  purpose  of  Chilling- 
worth's  book  was  not  to  promote  toleration,  but  to  defend 
Protestantism.  But  the  book  contained  many  strong 
expressions  in  favour  of  hberty  for  all  that  accepted  the 
Bible,  and  its  influence  made  in  that  direction.  Other 
books  promoting  the  same  tendency  were  Milton's  famous 
Areopagitica  (1644),  which  entered  an  eloquent  plea  for 
toleration  of  all  minor  differences  of  opinion,  and  his  tract. 
Of  True  Religion,  Heresy,  Schism,  Toleration,  and  what 
best  Means  may  he  used  against  the  Growth  of  Popery  (1673), 
an  endeavour  to  unite  all  Protestants  against  the  Roman 
Catholics  on  the  basis  of  the  Bible  ;  Jeremy  Taylor's 
Liberty  of  Prophesying  (1647),  which  made  the  Apostles* 
Creed  the  all-sufficient  standard,  and  maintained  that  all 
accepting  it  should  be  recognised  as  Christians  ;  Locke's 
Letters  on  Toleration  (1689),  an  elaborate  and  thorough- 
going discussion  of  the  whole  question  of  state  toleration, 
in  which  the  principle  was  laid  down  that  the  government 


X.]  RATIONALISM  191 

should  not  interfere  in  religious  matters,  and  should 
prohibit  only  avowed  atheism  and  overt  acts  inimical  to 
the  civil  life  of  the  community;  finally,  Anthony  Collins's 
Discourse  of  Free  Thinking  (1713),  championing  unlimited 
and  unconditional  liberty  for  all  kinds  of  religious  or 
irreligious  opinion  on  the  theory  that  his  own  individual 
reason  is  the  supreme  guide  of  every  man,  and  that  he 
should  not  be  prevented  from  following  it,  in  what- 
ever direction  it  might  lead,  but  on  the  contrary, 
should  be  encouraged  to  do  so.  The  position  taken  by 
Collins  was  that  of  the  Deists  in  general,  of  whom  he 
was  one.  A  fundamental  tenet  with  all  of  them  was 
complete  religious  freedom  for  men  of  all  opinions  and  of 
all  sects. 

The  writings  referred  to,  and  they  are  but  a  few  of  a 
large  class  of  similar  works,  show  a  steadily  growing 
breadth  of  toleration.  After  the  Revolution  of  1688,  a 
reaction  against  the  religious  strife  of  the  past  hundred 
years  made  itself  widely  felt,  and  the  necessity  of  at 
least  some  measure  of  toleration  was  generally  admitted. 
Commercial  and  industrial  interests,  which  had  suffered 
greatly  during  the  troublous  years  of  the  seventeenth 
century,  began  now  to  force  themselves  to  the  front,  and 
peace  and  quiet  came  to  be  recognised  as  the  supreme 
need  of  the  country.  In  1689,  upon  the  accession  of 
William  and  Mary,  the  famous  Act  of  Toleration  was 
passed  by  Parliament,  ensuring  religious  liberty  to  all 
Protestants  except  Unitarians.  Roman  Catholic  and 
anti-Trinitarian  dissent  remained  still  under  the  ban. 
Toleration  of  the  former  seemed  to  involve  too  great  a 
danger  to  the  State,  and  toleration  of  the  latter  was  de- 
manded by  too  small  a  group  to  make  it  seem  worth  while. 
Thenceforth  though  the  English  Establishment  remained 
unimpaired,  and  though  some  sort  of  religious  profession 
and  attendance  upon  some  form  of  religious  worship 
were   required,   Protestant   trinitarian   dissent  was   legal 


192  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

in  England,  and  every  kind  of  non- conformity  was  practi- 
cally, though  not  theoretically  tolerated. 

The  rigid  press  licensing  act  of  1662  was  repealed  in 
1695,  and  the  embargo  upon  the  publication  of  radical 
and  heterodox  opinions  in  religion  was  thus  removed,  but 
the  laws  against  blasphemy  were  renewed  in  1698,  and 
thereafter  process  could  be  instituted  against  any  one 
issuing  works  of  too  offensive  a  character.  Under  this 
act  an  occasional  writer  was  fined  and  imprisoned,  but  in 
the  main  it  was  possible  by  the  exercise  of  a  little  care  to 
give  utterance  to  any  kind  of  religious  radicalism  one  might 
wish.  Voltaire,  who  was  in  England  in  the  twenties, 
marvelled  at  the  degree  of  liberty  enjoyed  by  the  most 
diverse  parties,  and  hailed  England  as  the  haven  of  all  men 
of  advanced  religious  views. 

Many  causes  besides  those  already  indicated  were  unit- 
ing during  this  period  to  promote  rationalism  and  to  ex- 
tend its  influence  among  the  thinking  classes  of  England 
as  well  as  of  the  Continent.  In  the  philosophical  sphere, 
the  work  of  Descartes  and  his  school,  of  Spinoza,  Hobbes, 
and  Locke,  in  the  scientific  world  the  discoveries  and  the 
theories  of  Bruno,  Copernicus,  Galileo,  Kepler,  Gassendi, 
Bacon,  Newton,  and  others,  combined  to  promote  the 
credit  of  human  reason  and  to  undermine  the  authority 
of  traditional  systems  and  opinions.  The  scepticism  and 
materialism  of  Hobbes  called  into  being  the  Platonism, 
or  rather  the  Neo-Platonism  of  the  Cambridge  school,  with 
their  emphasis  upon  reason  as  a  faculty  by  which  we  may 
enjoy  a  direct  vision  of  spiritual  realities  hidden  from  the 
senses  and  inaccessible  by  the  ordinary  processes  of  dis- 
cursive reason.^  The  beauty  and  spirituality  of  the 
writings  of  some  members  of  this  school  gave  them  a  con- 
siderable following,  and  promoted,  not  only  a  spirit  of 

1  On  the  Cambridge  Platonists  see  Tulloch's  Rational  Theology  in  Ewjland 
in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  vol.  ii.  Prominent  among  them  were  Benjamin 
Whichcote,  Henry  More,  Ralph  Cud  worth  (author  of  the  famous  Intellectual 
Systmi  of  the  Universe)^  and  John  Smith. 


X.]  RATIONALISM  193 

tolerance,  but  also  confidence  in  the  use  of  human  reason 
in  the  religious  sphere,  but  their  enthusiasm  and  mysti- 
cism were  too  foreign  to  the  external  and  practical  temper 
of  the  age  to  find  wide  acceptance,  and  their  influence  was 
largely  exhausted  in  the  general  effects  just  referred  to. 

A  few  quotations  from  a  discourse  by  John  Smith  on 
The  Excellency  and  Nobleness  of  True  Religion  will  suffici- 
ently illustrate  the  general  temper  and  attitude  of  the  group. 
'  All  perfections  and  excellencies  are  to  be  measured  by 
their  approach  to  and  participation  of  the  First  Perfection,' 
and  '  Religion  is  the  greatest  participation  of  God  '  (p.  369). 
*  A  good  man,  one  that  is  actuated  by  religion,  lives  in 
converse  with  his  own  reason  ;  he  lives  at  the  height  of 
his  own  being  '  (p.  376).  '  A  good  man,  one  that  is  in- 
formed by  true  religion,  lives  above  himself  and  is  raised 
to  an  intimate  converse  with  the  Divinity.  He  moves  in 
a  larger  sphere  than  his  own  being  and  cannot  be  content 
to  enjoy  himself  except  he  may  enjoy  God  too,  and  himself 
in  God.  This  we  shall  consider  two  ways.  First  in  the 
self-denial  of  good  men ;  they  are  content  and  ready  to 
deny  themselves  for  God.  I  mean  not  that  they  should 
deny  their  own  reason  as  some  would  have  it,  for  that 
were  to  deny  a  beam  of  divine  light  and  so  to  deny  God, 
instead  of  denying  ourselves  for  Him  *  (p.  378).  *  The 
first  property  and  effect  of  true  religion  whereby  it  ex- 
presses its  own  nobleness  is  this  that  it  widens  and  enlarges 
all  the  faculties  of  the  soul,  and  begets  a  true  ingenuity, 
liberty,  and  amplitude,  the  most  free  and  generous  spirit, 
in  the  mind  of  good  men '  (p.  382).  *  I  doubt  we  are  too 
nice  logicians  sometimes  in  distinguishing  between  the 
glory  of  God  and  our  own  salvation.  We  cannot  in  a  true 
sense  seek  our  own  salvation  more  than  the  glory  of  God, 
which  triumphs  most  and  discovers  itself  most  effectually 
in  the  salvation  of  souls ;  for,  indeed,  this  salvation  is 
nothing  else  but  a  true  participation  of  the  divine  nature. 
Heaven  is  not  a  thing  without  us,  nor  is  happiness  anything 

N 


194  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

distinct  from  a  true  conjunction  of  the  mind  with  God 
in  a  secret  feeling  of  His  goodness  and  reciprocation  of 
affection  to  Him  wherein  the  divine  glory  most  unfolds 
itself '  (p.  399).  *  The  sixth  property  or  effect  wherein 
religion  discovers  its  own  excellency  is  this — that  it 
spiritualises  material  things,  and  so  carries  up  the  souls  of 
good  men  from  earthly  things  to  things  divine,  from  this 
sensible  world  to  the  intellectual.*  '  But  how  to  find  God 
here  and  feelingly  to  converse  with  Him,  and  being  affected 
with  the  sense  of  the  divine  glory  shining  out  upon  creation 
how  to  pass  out  of  the  sensible  world  into  the  intellectual, 
is  not  so  effectually  taught  by  that  philosophy  which  pro- 
fessed it  most  as  by  true  religion  :  that  which  knits  and 
unites  God  and  the  soul  together  can  best  teach  it  how  to 
ascend  and  descend  upon  those  golden  links  that  unite, 
as  it  were,  the  world  to  God.  That  divine  wisdom  that 
contrived  and  beautified  this  glorious  structure  can  best 
explain  her  own  art  and  carry  up  the  soul  back  again  in 
these  reflected  beams  to  Him  who  is  the  fountain  of  them  ' 
(p.  419). 

The  spirituality  of  these  men  and  their  emphasis  upon 
immediate  apprehension  of  God  and  divine  things  were 
out  of  line  with  the  tendencies  of  the  period  in  which  they 
lived,  and  their  influence  was  but  circumscribed  and 
temporary.  They  were  at  one  with  the  spirit  of  the  age 
in  recognising  the  dignity  and  power  of  human  reason, 
but  their  interpretation  of  it  was  quite  unlike  that  of  their 
contemporaries,  and  was  almost  universally  rejected. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  growing  rationalism  of  the  day 
found  consistent  expression  in  a  number  of  writers  of  the 
late  seventeenth  and  early  eighteenth  centuries,  prominent 
among  whom  was  the  ecclesiastic  and  preacher,  John 
Tillotson,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.^  Archbishop  Tillotson, 

^  Tillotaon's  Works,  composed  principally  of  sermons,  hare  been  frequectlj 
published.  I  have  used  the  edition  in  twelve  volumes  published  in  Londom 
in  1857. 


x]  RATIONALISM  195 

the  most  famous  preacher  of  his  day,  was  a  foe  of  mysti- 
cism and  religious  enthusiasm  in  every  form  and  a  sturdy 
champion  of  the  use  of  reason  in  rehgion.  By  reason  he 
meant  a  faculty  very  unlike  the  Cambridge  Platonists' 
faculty  of  direct  vision.  Of  spiritual  intuition  or  the 
immediate  apprehension  of  supersensuous  realities,  he 
would  hear  nothing.  When  he  insisted  upon  the  use  of 
reason  in  religion,  he  meant  that  religion  is  an  affair  that 
offers  itself  for  acceptance  like  a  philosophical  system, 
a  political  principle,  or  a  financial  investment.  He  thought 
of  it,  not  as  something  instinctive,  which  needs  justifica- 
tion no  more  than  hunger  and  thirst,  or  pleasure  and  pain, 
but  as  a  system  of  rational  propositions  given  from  without 
and  to  be  tested  as  any  other  propositions  are  tested,  and 
to  be  established  by  rational  evidence.  Religion,  accord- 
ing to  Tillotson,  is  not  an  end  in  itself,  worthful  on  its 
own  account,  independently  of  its  effects ;  its  only  value 
lies  in  the  fact  that  it  provides  divine  sanctions  for  morality. 
These  are  given  in  natural  religion  which  teaches  that 
^iiiere  is  a  God,  that  He  demands  virtuous  living  on  the 
part  of  man,  and  that  He  will  reward  the  righteous  and 
punish  the  wicked.^  But  natural  religion  is  not  enough. 
Its  sanctions  have  proved  ineffective,  and  it  has  therefore 
been  supplemented  by  revelation.  The  function  of  the 
latter  is  not  to  destroy  or  correct  natural  religion,  but 
simply  to  make  it  clearer  and  more  effective.  '  Natural 
religion,'  Tillotson  says,  '  is  the  foundation  of  all  revealed 
religion,  and  revelation  is  designed  simply  to  establish  its 
duties.'  2  \,  It  is  true  that  certain  requirements  are  added 
by  revelation,  particularly  that  we  should  recognise  Christ 
as  the  Son  of  God,  worship  God  in  His  name,  and  receive 
the  sacraments,  but  these  are  enjoined  with  the  same  purpose 
of  promoting  virtuel^  The  sacraments  impress  us  with  the 
heinousness  of  sin,  and  the  figure  of  Christ  supplies  both 
example  and  inspiration. 
1  Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  336  ff.      2  ji,ia,  yol.  ii.  p.  383.       •  Cf.  Ibid.  vol.  iii.  p.  463. 


196  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [oh. 

Revelation  imparts  no  new  faculties,  nor  does  it  appeal 
to  any  other  faculty  than  reason,  to  which  natural  religion 
also  appeals.  The  use  of  the  term  faith  does  not  set  either 
natural  or  revealed  religion  apart  from  other  purely  human 
affairs.  Faith  is  simply  a  persuasion  of  the  mind  concern- 
ing the  truth  of  any  proposition  or  '  a  persuasion  of  the 
mind  concerning  any  thing.'  ^  It  is  thus  solely  intellectual 
and  is  only  a  stronger  form  of  opinion.  We  may  have 
faith  in  the  truths  of  natural  religion,  in  the  truths  of  re- 
vealed religion,  or  in  the  fact  of  revelation.  In  any  case, 
faith  is  simply  the  conviction,  based  upon  rational  grounds, 
that  certain  things  are  true.^  Faith  thus  leads  to  virtue, 
for  the  religious  truths  offered  for  our  acceptance  are  all 
of  them  given  with  the  promotion  of  virtue  in  view.  This 
is  particularly  true  of  the  future  life  with  its  rewards  and 
punishments,  behef  in  which  Tillotson  regards  as  '  the 
great  motive  and  argument  to  a  holy  life.'  ^  If  we  accept 
this  and  other  truths  given  in  religion  we  are  convinced 
of  the  advantages  of  righteous  living ;  if  we  reject  them, 
no  motive  for  such  living  remains. 

According  to  Tillotson,  as  already  said,  revelation 
supplements  natural  religion.  But  what  are  the  grounds 
for  believing  in  revelation  ?  How  do  we  know  that  there 
has  been  such  a  thing  and  that  any  alleged  revelation  is 
true  ?  This  raises  the  whole  question  of  Christian  evi- 
dences, and  to  its  discussion  Tillotson  devotes  many  sermons. 
He  maintains  that  two  things  must  be  shown  if  an  alleged 
revelation  is  to  be  accepted  as  genuine — that  it  does  not 
contradict  the  principles  of  natural  religion,  and  that 
there  are  positive  reasons  for  supposing  it  a  revelation 
stronger  than  those  that  can  be  brought  against  it.  In 
defence  of  Christianity  he  urges  its  complete  harmony 
with  natural  religion,  the  reasonableness  of  its  precepts 
and  their  fitness  to  the  nature  of  man,  and  finally,  prophecy 
and  miracle.     Upon  Christ's  fulfilment  of  Old  Testament 

1  Works,  Tol.  xi.  p  203.        «  Ibid.  vol.  xi.  p.  431  flf.        »  Ibid.  vol.  v.  p.  99. 


X.]  RATIONALISM  197 

prophecy  he  lays  considerable  stress,  but  even  more  upon 
his  miracles,  which  constitute,  he  saj^s,  the  principal  and 
only  adequate  proof  of  Christianity.  In  his  sermon  on 
*  The  Miracles  wrought  in  Confirmation  of  Christianity,'  ^ 
after  declaring  that  '  miracles  are  a  divine  testimony  given 
to  a  person  or  doctrine,'  he  asks  '  What  a  miracle  is  ?  '  and 
'  In  what  circumstances  and  with  what  limitations  miracles 
are  a  sufficient  testimony  to  the  truth  and  divinity  of  any 
doctrine  ?  '  In  reply  to  the  former  question,  he  says, 
'  The  shortest  and  plainest  description  of  it  I  can  give  is 
this  :  that  it  is  a  supernatural  effect,  and  wonderful  to 
sense.  So  that  there  are  two  things  necessary  to  a  miracle  : 
that  it  be  a  supernatural  effect,  and  that  it  be  evident  and 
wonderful  to  sense.  By  a  supernatural  effect  I  mean  such 
an  effect  as  either  in  itself  and  in  its  own  nature,  or  in  the 
manner  and  circumstances  of  it,  exceeds  any  natural  power, 
that  we  know  of,  to  produce  it.'  '  There  is  another  con- 
dition also  required  to  a  miracle,  that  it  be  an  effect  evident 
and  wonderful  to  sense  ;  for  if  we  do  not  see  it,  it  is  to 
us  as  if  it  were  not,  and  can  be  no  testimony  or  proof 
of  any  thing  because  itself  stands  in  need  of  another 
miracle  to  give  testimony  to  it,  and  to  prove  that  it  was 
wrought.'  Transubstantiation,  therefore,  according  to 
Tillotsdn,  even  if  it  were  a  fact,  would  not  be  a  miracle, 
for  a  miracle  is  not  merely  a  wonderful  or  supernatural 
event,  but  a  sign  wrought  for  purposes  of  proof.  If  the 
so-called  miracles  of  Jesus,  for  instance,  were  merely  works 
of  mercy  done  for  the  good  of  the  sufferer,  and  were  not 
signs  intended  to  substantiate  the  fact  of  a  divine  revela- 
tion, they  were  not  miracles  at  all.  This  conception  of 
miracle  it  is  necessary  to  keep  in  mind  if  we  would  under- 
stand the  development  that  followed. 

In  reply  to  his  second  question  as  to  the  circumstances 
and  limitations  under  which  miracles  may  be  a  sufficient 
testimony  to  the  truth  or  divinity  of  any  doctrine,  Tillot- 
1  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  493  fF. 


19d  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KiLNT  [ch. 

son  says,  *  Now  there  are  two  things  must  concur  to  give 
the  mind  of  man  full  satisfaction  that  any  religion  is  from 
God.  First,  if  the  person  that  declares  this  religion  give 
testimony  of  his  divine  authority,  that  is,  that  he  is  sent 
and  commissioned  by  God  for  that  purpose.  And  secondly, 
if  the  religion  which  he  declares  contain  nothing  in  it  that 
is  plainly  repugnant  to  the  nature  of  God.'  And  again, 
'  For  though  a  doctrine  be  never  so  reasonable  in  itself, 
this  is  no  certain  argument  that  it  is  from  God  if  no  testi- 
mony from  heaven  be  given  to  it ;  because  it  may  be  the 
result  and  issue  of  human  reason  and  discourse  ;  and 
though  a  doctrine  be  attested  by  miracles,  yet  the  matter 
of  it  may  be  so  unreasonable  and  absurd,  so  unworthy 
of  God,  and  so  contrary  to  the  natural  notions  which  man 
has  of  him,  that  no  miracles  can  be  sufficient  to  give  con- 
firmation to  it ;  and  therefore  in  some  cases  the  Scripture 
forbids  men  to  hearken  to  a  prophet  though  he  work  a 
miracle.  .  .  .  From  whence  it  is  plain  that  a  miracle  is 
not  sufficient  to  establish  the  worship  of  a  false  God. 
The  sum  of  what  I  have  said  is  this  :  that  we  do  not  found 
our  belief  of  Christianity  upon  any  one  argument  taken 
by  itself ;  but  upon  the  whole  evidence  which  we  are 
able  to  produce  for  it,  in  which  there  is  nothing  wanting 
that  is  proper  and  reasonable  to  prove  any  religion  to  be 
from  God.  But  yet  miracles  are  the  principal  external 
proof  and  confirmation  of  the  divinity  of  a  doctrine.  I 
told  you  before  that  some  doctrines  are  so  absurd  that  a 
miracle  is  not  a  sufficient  proof  of  them  :  but  if  a  doctrine 
be  such  as  is  noways  imworthy  of  God,  nor  contrary  to 
those  notions  which  we  have  of  Him,  miracles  are  the 
highest  testimony  that  can  be  given  to  it,  and  have  always 
been  owned  by  mankind  for  an  evidence  of  inspiration.'  ^ 
The  external  and  formal  conception  of  the  divine  is 

1  Compare  also  the  sennon  on  'The  Trial  of  the  Spirits,'  Works,  vol.  ii. 
p.  29  sq.  This  contains  Tillotson's  famous  argument  against  traniubstantiation 
to  which  Hume  refers  in  his  Essay  on  Miracles. 


x.j  RATIONALISM  1&9 

noticeable  throughout  Tillotson's  discussion.  Even  after 
a  thing  is  proved  good  and  true,  there  is  needed  the  evi- 
dence of  a  miracle  to  show  that  it  comes  from  God.  No 
spiritual  or  moral  effects  warrant  the  assumption  of  divine 
activity.  It  can  be  guaranteed  only  by  physical  pheno- 
mena. The  supreme  and  convincing  proof  of  Christianity 
lies,  not  in  its  character  or  influence,  but  in  the  external 
miracles  which  attended  its  inception,  and  were  wrought 
in  confirmation  of  it.  It  would  be  unjust  to  Tillotson  to 
leave  the  impression  that  he  was  interested  only  in  Christian 
evidences  and  devoted  all  his  sermons  to  proving  the  divine 
origin  of  Christianity  in  the  way  that  has  been  indicated. 
A  glance  at  the  titles  of  his  many  published  discourses 
shows  that  he  had  much  else  upon  his  heart,  and  that  he 
covered  a  wide  range  of  religious  and  ethical  subjects. 
But  it  is  the  side  of  his  thought  that  has  been  presented 
which  has  chief  historical  importance,  and  which  alone 
needs  notice  here.  He  set  the  fashion  for  nearly  all 
Christian  thinkers  that  came  after  him  for  a  number  of 
generations.  Emphasis  was  more  and  more  laid  upon  the 
rational  evidences  for  Christianity,  upon  its  harmony  with 
natural  religion,  and  the  miracles  wrought  in  its  support, 
making  up  its  appeal  to  the  cool  and  dehberate  reason 
of  the  man  of  common  sense,  while  the  inner  experience 
of  the  presence  of  the  divine,  the  immediate  vision  of 
spiritual  realities,  was  condemned  as  unwholesome  enthusi-^ 
asm  and  unfounded  superstition. 

The  combination  in  Tillotson  of  the  rationalist  and 
the  supematuralist  was  typical  of  his  age.  Nothing 
is  to  be  accepted  that  does  not  approve  itself  to  the  native 
human  reason.  The  old  dictum  credo  quia  incredibile  is 
the  worst  of  heresies.  The  natural  man  is  not  a  blind 
being  who  must  believe  whatever  is  told  him,  and  must 
submit  his  judgment  implicitly  to  the  alleged  authority 
of  God.  Even  miracles  should  not  lead  him  to  stultify 
his  reason  and  accept  what  seems  to  him  irrational.    And 


200  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

yet  with  so  controlling  an  emphasis  on  the  reason  was 
associated  faith  in  the  supernatural.  Miracles  are  entirely 
reasonable  and  become  in  certain  circumstances  the  com- 
plete and  sufficient  proof  of  divine  revelation. 

With  Tillotson  agreed  his  younger  contemporary,  the 
philosopher,  John  Locke,  whose  discussion  of  the  whole 
subject  is  so  careful  and  acute,  and  presents  so  clearly 
the  controlling  principles  of  the  entire  rationalistic  move- 
ment, that  it  may  be  well  to  dwell  upon  him  for  a  little. 
In  accordance  with  his  general  epistemological  principles, 
Locke  denies  that  we  have  any  innate  idea  of  God,^  but 
maintains  that  by  rational  demonstration  we  may  reach 
the  certainty  that  God  exists.^  There  is,  therefore,  such 
a  thing  as  natural  religion,  that  is,  a  religion  which  we  may 
arrive  at  by  the  use  of  our  unaided  reason.  As  Locke 
employs  it  in  this  connection,  reason  is  not  intuitive, 
but  discursive.  '  The  greatest  part  of  our  knowledge,' 
he  says,  '  depends  upon  deductions  and  intermediate 
ideas  ;  and  in  those  cases  where  we  are  feign  to  substitute 
assent  instead  of  knowledge,  and  take  propositions  for  true, 
without  being  certain  they  are  so,  we  have  need  to  find  out, 
examine,  and  compare  the  grounds  of  their  probability. 
In  both  these  cases,  the  faculty  which  finds  out  the  means 
and  rightly  applies  them  to  discover  certainty  in  the  one 
case  and  probability  in  the  other,  is  that  which  we  call 
reason.'  ^  It  is  by  this  kind  of  reason  that  we  reach  our 
knowledge  of  God  and  of  religious  truth  in  general ;  not 
by  intuition  or  direct  vision,  but  by  the  ordinary  processes 
of  rational  demonstration. 

In  speaking  of  the  use  of  reason  in  religion,  Locke  takes 
up  the  familiar  phrases  '  above,'  '  contrary  to,'  and  *  ac- 
cording to '  reason,  and  says,  '  By  what  has  been  before 
said  of  reason  we  may  be  able  to  make  some  guess  at  the 
distinction  of  things  into  those  that  are  according  to, 

1  Essay  on  the  Human  Understanding,  bk.  I.  obap.  iy, 

a  Prid.  bk.  it.  chap.  x.  «  Ibid.  §  2. 


X.]  RATIONALISM  201 

above,  and  contrary  to  reason.  According  to  reason  are 
such  propositions  whose  truth  we  can  disco-ver  by  examin- 
ing and  tracing  those  ideas  we  have  from  sensation 
and  reflection  ;  and  by  natural  deduction  find  to  be  true 
or  probable.  Above  reason  are  such  propositions  whose 
truth  or  probability  we  cannot  by  reason  derive  from 
those  principles.  Contrary  to  reason  are  such  proposi- 
tions as  are  inconsistent  with,  or  irreconcilable  to  our  clear 
and  distinct  ideas.  Thus  the  existence  of  one  God  is  ac- 
cording to  reason ;  the  existence  of  more  than  one  God 
contrary  to  reason;  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  above 
reason.'  ^ 

Divine  revelation  may  give  man  a  knowledge  of  things 
which  are  also  discoverable  by  natural  reason,  that  is, 
it  may  give  him  things  that  are  according  to  reason,  but 
'  In  all  things  of  this  kind,  there  is  little  need  or  use  of 
revelation,  God  having  furnished  us  with  natural  and 
surer  means  to  arrive  at  a  knowledge  of  them.;  For 
whatsoever  truth  we  come  to  a  clearer  discovery  of  from 
the  knowledge  and  contemplation  of  our  own  ideas,  will 
always  be  certainer  to  us  than  those  which  are  conveyed 
to  us  by  traditional  revelation.'  And  again  revelation 
may  give  us  things  that  are  above  reason,  '  there  being 
many  things  wherein  we  have  very  imperfect  notions  or 
none  at  all ;  and  other  things  of  whose  past,  present, 
or  future  existence  by  the  natural  use  of  our  faculties  we 
can  have  no  knowledge  at  all ;  these,  as  being  beyond 
the  discovery  of  our  natural  faculties  and  above  reason, 
are,  when  revealed,  the  proper  matter  of  faith.  Thus 
that  part  of  the  angels  rebelled  against  God,  and  thereby 
lost  their  first  happy  state  ;  and  that  the  dead  shall  rise 
and  live  again  :  these  and  the  like  being  bey^ond  the 
discovery  of  reason,  are  purely  matters  of  faith  with  which 
reason  has  directly  nothing  to  do.' 

The  category  *  above  reason '  was  more  narrowly  de- 

1  Essay  c»  the  Human  Understanding,  bk.  iv.  chap.  xvii.  §  23. 


202  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [cH. 

fined  by  a  young  Irish  disciple  of  Locke,  John  Toland, 
in  his  interesting  little  book  entitled  Christianity  not 
Mysterious  (1696).  According  to  Toland,  when  it  is  said 
that  revelation  gives  us  things  above  reason,  it  does  not 
mean  things  mysterious  or  incomprehensible  or  difficult 
to  understand,  but  simply  perfectly  rational  matters  that 
we  should  not  otherwise  have  heard  of,  or  events  that  have 
not  fallen  under  our  observation,  and  can  therefore  be 
known  only  on  the  testimony  of  others.  In  this  sense, 
revelation  may  enlarge  our  knowledge,  giving  us  an  ac- 
quaintance with  unfamiliar  events  or  truths,  but  above 
reason  as  transcending  our  comprehension,  or  as  too  pro- 
found or  mysterious  for  the  natural  man  to  penetrate, 
revealed  facts  cannot  be.  There  are,  therefore,  strictly 
speaking,  only  two  categories  :  according  to,  and  contrary 
to  reason,  but  reasonable  facts  and  truths  may  be  dis- 
covered by  us  for  ourselves  or  may  be  made  known  to  us 
by  the  testimony  of  others,  and  this  testimony  may  be 
given  by  revelation.  Although  he  was  later  known  as 
a  Deist,  Toland  did  not  deny  the  reality  of  revelation  in 
this  book,  nor  did  he  ostensibly  go  beyond  the  position 
taken  by  Locke,  but  he  defined  it  more  carefully  and 
guarded  it  against  misunderstanding,  and  in  so  doing, 
really  advanced  further  than  Locke  and  most  Christians 
of  the  day  were  willing  to  go  in  the  direction  of  rationalis- 
ing all  Christian  truth.  He  performed  a  real  service  in 
calling  attention  to  the  irrational  character  of  the  category 
above  reason  as  it  was  commonly  understood,  showing 
that  it  was  often  a  hiding  place  for  all  sorts  of  beUefs  in 
reality  contrary  to  reason. 

Toland's  position  was  taken  also,  if  possible  with  even 
greater  clearness  and  emphasis,  by  Anthony  Collins  in  a 
book  entitled  Essay  concerning  the  use  of  Reason  in  Proposi- 
tions, the  Evidence  whereof  depends  on  Human  Testimony'^ 
(1707), 

But  to  return  to  Locke  himself.     While  he  claims  that 


X.J  RATIONALISM  203 

revelation  may  give  us  things  according  to  reason  or  above 
reason,  nothing  contrary  to  reason  can  be  admitted  on  its 
authority.  *  For  since  no  evidence  of  our  faculties  by  which 
we  receive  such  revelations  can  exceed,  if  equal,  the 
certainty  of  our  intuitive  knowledge,  we  can  never  receive 
for  a  truth  any  thing  that  is  directly  contrary  to  our  clear 
and  distinct  knowledge ;  for  instance,  the  ideas  of  one 
body  and  one  place  do  so  clearly  agree,  and  the  mind  has 
so  evident  a  perception  of  their  agreement,  that  we  can 
never  assent  to  a  proposition  that  affirms  the  same  body 
to  be  in  two  distant  places  at  once,,  however  it  should  pre- 
tend to  the  authority  of  a  divine  revelation  :  since  the 
evidence — first  that  we  deceive  not  ourselves  in  ascribing 
it  to  God,  second,  that  we  understand  it  right — can 
never  be  so  great  as  the  evidence  of  our  own  intuitive 
knowledge  whereby  we  discern  it  impossible  for  the  same 
body  to  be  in  two  places  at  once.  And,  therefore,  no 
proposition  can  be  received  for  divine  revelation  or  obtain 
the  assent  due  to  all  such  if  it  be  contradictory  to  our 
clear  intuitive  knowledge.'  *  '  Whatever  God  hath  re- 
vealed is  certainly  true,  no  doubt  can  be  made  of  it.  This 
is  the  proper  object  of  faith  :  but  whether  it  be  a  divine 
revelation  or  no,  reason  must  judge  ;  which  can  never 
permit  the  mind  to  reject  a  greater  evidence  to  embrace 
what  is  less  evident,  nor  allow  it  to  entertain  probabiHty 
in  opposition  to  knowledge  and  certainty.  There  can  be 
no  evidence  that  any  traditional  revelation  is  of  divine 
origin,  in  the  words  we  receive  it  and  in  the  sense  we  under- 
stand it,  so  clear  and  so  certain  as  that  of  the  principles  of 
reason  ;  and  therefore  nothing  that  is  contrary  to  and 
inconsistent  with  the  clear  and  self-evident  dictates  of 
reason  has  a  right  to  be  urged  or  assented  to  as  a  matter 
of  faith  wherein  reason  has  nothing  to  do.'  ? 

*In  all  that  is  of  divine  revelation  there  is  need  of  no 

^  Essay  on  the  Sutnan  Understanding,  bk.  IT.  chap.  ZTiii.  §  5. 
«  Ibid.  §  10. 


204         PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ca. 

other  proof  but  that  it  is  an  inspiration  from  God  ;  for  He 
can  neither  deceive  nor  be  deceived.  But  how  shall  it 
be  known  that  any  proposition  in  our  minds  is  a  truth 
infused  by  God  ;  a  truth  that  is  revealed  to  us  by  Him 
which  He  declares  to  us,  and  therefore  we  ought  to  believe  ? 
Here  it  is  that  enthusiasm  fails  of  the  evidence  it  pretends 
to.  For  men  thus  possessed  boast  of  a  light  whereby 
they  say  they  are  enlightened  and  brought  into  the  know- 
ledge of  this  or  that  truth.  But  if  they  know  it  to  be  a 
truth,  they  must  know  it  to  be  so  either  by  its  own  self- 
evidence  to  natural  reason,  or  by  the  rational  proofs  that 
make  it  out  to  be  so.  If  they  see  and  know  it  to  be  a  truth 
either  of  these  two  ways,  they  in  vain  suppose  it  to  be  a 
revelation.  For  they  know  it  to  be  true  by  the  same  way 
that  any  other  man  naturally  may  know  that  it  is  so  with- 
out the  help  of  revelation. ...  If  they  say  they  know  it  to  be 
true  because  it  is  a  revelation  from  God,  the  reason  is  good  ; 
but  then  it  will  be  demanded  how  they  know  it  to  be  a 
revelation  from  God  ?  If  they  say  by  the  light  it  brings 
with  it,  which  shines  bright  in  their  minds,  and  they 
cannot  resist,  I  beseech  them  to  consider  whether  this  be 
any  more  than  what  we  have  taken  notice  of  already, 
namely,  that  it  is  a  revelation  because  they  strongly 
believe  it  to  be  true.  .  .  .  For  rational  grounds  from  proofs 
that  it  is  a  truth,  they  must  acknowledge  to  have  none ; 
for  then  it  is  not  perceived  as  a  revelation,  but  upon  the 
ordinary  grounds  that  other  truths  are  received ;  and  if 
they  believe  it  to  be  true  because  it  is  a  revelation,  and  have 
no  other  reason  for  its  being  a  revelation,  but  because  they 
are  fully  persuaded  without  any  'other  reason  that  it  is 
true,  they  believe  it  to  be  a  revelation  only  because  they 
strongly  believe  it  to  be  a  revelation ;  which  is  a  very 
unsafe  ground  to  proceed  on  either  in  our  tenets  or  actions.'* 
*  Thus  we  see  the  holy  men  of  old  who  had  revelations  from 
God  had  something  else  besides  that  internal  light  of  assur- 
>  Xssay  on  the  Euman  Understanding,  bk.  xv.  cliap.  zyiii.  §  11. 


X.]  EATIONALISM  205 

ance  in  their  own  mind  to  testify  to  them  that  it  was  from 
God.  They  were  not  left  to  their  own  persuasions  alone 
that  those  persuasions  were  from  God,  but  had  outward 
signs  to  convince  them  of  the  author  of  those  revelations. 
And  when  they  were  to  convince  others  they  had  a  power 
given  them  to  justify  the  truth  of  their  commission  from 
heaven,  and  by  visible  signs  to  assert  the  divine  authority 
of  a  message  they  were  sent  with.'  ^ 

Evidently  Locke's  position  is  identical  with  Tillotson'sl 
Nothing  can  be  received  as  a  divine  revelation  if  it  contra- 
dicts reason,  and  nothing  is  to  be  received  as  such  except 
on  external  evidence,  that  is,  the  evidence  of  miracles 
which  alone  can  prove  a  revelation  to  be  from  God.  In 
his  brief  Discourse  of  Miracles  (published  posthumously 
in  1706),  Locke  discussed  the  nature  of  a  miracle  and  the 
testimony  which  it  gives.  A  miracle,  he  says,  is  '  a  sensible 
operation,  which  being  above  the  comprehension  of  the 
spectator  and  in  his  opinion  contrary  to  the  established 
course  of  nature,  is  taken  by  him  to  be  divine.'  ^  Its 
purpose  is  solely  to  give  credentials  to  a  person  as  God's 
messenger,  and  so  to  confirm  the  divine  origin  of  the 
revelation  brought  by  him.  '  Divine  revelation  receives 
testimony  from  no  other  miracles  but  such  as  are  wrought 
to  witness  his  mission  from  God  who  delivers  the  revela- 
tion. All  other  miracles  that  are  done  in  the  world,  how 
many  or  great  soever,  revelation  is  not  concerned  in.' 
And  even  the  greatest  miracles  cannot  prove  a  revela- 
tion to  be  from  God  which  is  out  of  accord  with  our 
natural  knowledge  of  God,  or,  in  other  words,  contrary  to 
reason. 

In  his  little  book  entitled  The  Reasonableness  of 
Christianity  (1695),  Locke  applied  the  general  principles 
laid  down  in  the  fourth  book  of  his  Essay  on  the  Human 
Understanding,  to  the  Christian  system,  and  undertook 

1  Essay  on  the  Human  Understanding,  bk.  IV.  chap,  xviii.  §  16. 
•  Discourse  of  MiracleSj  p.  217. 


206  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

to  show  that  it  is  both  rational  and  adequately  attested) 
He  recognised  that  there  was  much  in  traditional  Christian-^y 
ity  contrary  to  sound  reason,  and  he  therefore  examined  ^ 
the  Scriptures  in  considerable  detail  to  discover  the  essence 
of  Christianity  as  taught  by  Christ  and  His  apostles. 
He  found  that  they  set  forth  only  two  conditions  of  salva- 
tion :  the  belief  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  and  a  righteous 
life.  *  These  two,  faith  and  repentance,  that  is,  believing 
Jesus  to  be  the  Messiah,  and  a  good  hfe,  are  the  indispens- 
able conditions  of  the  new  covenant  to  be  performed  by 
all  those  who  would  obtain  eternal  life.'  ^  To  one  who 
believes  in  Jesus  as  the  Messiah,  and  tries  to  live  as  he 
should,  his  faith  will  be  graciously  reckoned  for  righteous- 
ness and  allowed  to  make  up  for  the  imperfections  in  his 
conduct.^  All  this,  according  to  Locke,  is  eminently 
rational.  Viewed  in  this  way,  as  Christ  Himself  and  His 
apostles  understood  it,  Christianity  contains  nothing 
inconsistent  with  reason,  and  moreover,  it  is  positively 
attested  by  miracles.^  Thus  it  fully  meets  the  require- 
ments of  a  true  revelation. 

In  the  same  book  Locke  raises  the  general  question  why 
there  should  be  a  revelation.  If  natural  religion  is  true  and 
good,  why  is  it  not  enough  ?  It  is  evident  that  the  greater 
the  emphasis  laid  upon  the  truth  and  obligation  of  the 
religion  of  nature,  the  more  pressing  such  a  question  as 
this  becomes.  Locke  discusses  it  at  some  length,  and 
concludes  that  a  revelation  was  necessary  because  men  had 
widely  lost  the  knowledge  of  one  God  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  natural  reason  was  sufficient  to  lead  them  to  it ;  that 
they  were  more  or  less  in  the  dark  touching  their  moral 
duties,  the  light  of  reason  being  inadequate  to  give  them 
clear  information  ;  that  divine  worship  required  simplify- 
ing and  purifying  ;    and  that  encouragement  to  virtue 

1  The  Reasonableness  of  Christianity ^  p.  202.  I  quote  from  the  second 
edition  published  in  1696. 

2  Ibid.  pp.  243,  250.  »  Ibid.  pp.  259  ff.,  2S0  ff. 


X.]  RATIONALISM  207 

was  needed  such  as  an  assurance  of  future  rewards  and 
punishments  was  fitted  to  give.^ 

Closely  related  to  Tillotson  and  Locke  in  his  view  of 
natural  and  revealed  religion,  was  Samuel  Clarke,  the 
most  famous  theologian,  and  after  Locke's  death,  the 
most  famous  philosopher  of  his  day  in  England.  He 
belonged  to  an  entirely  different  philosophical  school, 
standing  for  innate  ideas  and  a  priori  reasoning  over 
against  the  empiricism  of  the  older  philosopher,  but  his 
agreement  in  the  matter  of  natural  and  revealed  religion 
is  all  the  more  significant.  In  his  second  series  of  Boyle 
Lectures,  given  in  1705,  and  entitled  '  A  Discourse  concern- 
ing the  Unchangeable  Obligations  of  Natural  Religion,  and 
the  Truth  and  Certainty  of  the  Christian  Revelation,'  he 
maintained  that  natural  religion  is  based  on  the  necessary 
distinction  between  good  and  evil,  that  our  moral  obliga- 
tions express  the  will  of  God,  that  they  must  necessarily 
be  attended  with  rewards  and  punishments,  and  that  since 
such  rewards  and  punishments  are  not  equitably  distri- 
buted in  our  present  state  of  existence,  there  must  be 
another  life  beyond  the  grave.  Thus  natural  religion 
gives  us  a  belief  in  God,  in  virtue  as  His  will,  and  in  a  future 
life.  But  owing  to  the  corrupt  state  and  condition  of 
mankind,  very  few  are  able  to  discover  these  things  clearly 
for  themselves,  and  hence  there  is  needed  divine  revelation. 

'  There  was  plainly  wanting  a  divine  revelation  to  re- 
cover mankind  out  of  their  universal  corruption  and 
degeneracy,  and  without  such  a  revelation  it  was  not 
possible  that  the  world  should  ever  be  effectually  reformed. 
For  if  (as  has  been  before  particularly  shown)  the  gross 
and  stupid  ignorance,  the  innumerable  prejudices  and 
vain  opinions,  the  strong  passions  and  appetites  of  sense, 
and  the  many  vicious  customs  and  habits,  which  the 
generality  of  mankind  continually  labour  under,  make  it 
undeniably  too  difficult  a  work  for  men  of  all  capacities 

1  The  Reasonableness  of  Christianity,  p.  257  flf. 


208  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

to  discover  every  one  for  himself,  by  the  bare  light  of 
nature,  all  the  particular  branches  of  their  duty  ;  but  most 
men,  in  the  present  state  of  things,  have  manifestly  need 
of  much  teaching,  and  particular  instruction  :  if  those 
who  were  best  able  to  discover  the  truth  and  instruct 
others  therein,  namely  the  wisest  and  best  of  the  philo- 
sophers, were  themselves  unavoidably  altogether  ignorant 
of  some  doctrines,  and  very  doubtful  and  uncertain  of 
others,  absolutely  necessary  to  the  bringing  about  that 
great  end,  the  reformation  of  mankind  :  if  those  truths 
which  they  were  themselves  very  certain  of,  they  were  not 
yet  able  to  prove  and  explain  clearly  enough,  to  vulgar 
understandings  :  if  even  those  things  which  they  proved 
sufficiently,  and  explained  with  all  clearness,  they  had  not 
yet  authority  enough  to  enforce  and  inculcate  upon 
men's  minds  with  so  strong  an  impression,  as  to  influence 
and  govern  the  general  practice  of  the  world,  nor  pre- 
tended to  afford  men  any  supernatural  assistance,  which 
yet  was  very  necessary  to  so  great  a  work  :  and  if,  after 
all,  in  the  discovery  of  such  matters  as  are  the  great 
motives  of  religion,  men  are  apt  to  be  more  easily  worked 
upon,  and  more  strongly  affected,  by  good  testimony, 
than  by  the  strictest  abstract  arguments ;  so  that,  upon 
the  whole,  'tis  plain  the  philosophers  were  never  by  any 
means  well  qualified  to  reform  mankind  with  any  con- 
siderable success ;  then  there  was  evidently  wanting 
some  particular  revelation,  which  might  supply  all  these 
defects.  There  was  plainly  a  necessity  of  some  particular 
revelation,  to  discover  in  what  manner,  and  with  what 
kmd  of  external  service,  God  might  acceptably  be  wor- 
shipped. There  was  a  necessity  of  some  particular  revela- 
tion, to  discover  what  expiation  God  would  accept  for  sin, 
by  which  the  authority,  honour,  and  dignity  of  His  laws 
might  be  effectually  vindicated.  There  was  a  necessity 
of  some  particular  revelation,  to  give  men  full  assurance 
of  the  truth  of  those  great  motives  of  religion,  the  rewards 


X.]  RATIONALISM  209 

and  punishments  of  a  future  state,  which,  notwithstanding 
the  strongest  arguments  of  reason,  men  could  not  yet 
forbear  doubting  of.  In  fine,  there  was  a  necessity  of 
some  particular  divine  revelation,  to  make  the  whole 
doctrine  of  religion  clear  and  obvious  to  all  capacities,  to 
add  weight  and  authority  to  the  plainest  precepts,  and  to 
furnish  men  with  extraordinary  assistances  to  enable  them 
to  overcome  the  corruptions  of  their  nature.  And  without 
the  assistance  of  such  a  revelation,  'tis  manifest  it  was  not 
possible  that  the  world  could  ever  be  effectually  reformed ' 
(Prop.  vii.  §  1). 

Thus,  in  the  opinion  of  Clarke,  as  well  as  of  Tillotson| 
and  Locke,  natural  religion  is  good  and  true  so  far  as  it 
goes,  but  it  does  not  go  far  enough,  and  hence  needs  to  be 
supplemented  by  revelation  which  must  not  in  any  way 
contradict  it,  but  must  be  consistent  with  it  in  all  its  parts.3:^ 

Christianity  according  to  Clarke  is  the  only  alleged 
revelation  in  which  there  is  any  pretence  of  reason,  and 
therefore  its  claims  alone  need  examination.  In  proof 
of  the  fact  that  it  is  of  divine  origin,  he  asserts  that  the 
practical  duties  inculcated  by  Christ  are  agreeable  to  our 
natural  notions  of  God,  and  conduce  to  human  happiness 
and  well-being ;  that  the  motives  taught  by  Christ, 
particularly  future  rewards  and  punishments,  are  suitable 
to  divine  wisdom  and  fit  the  expectations  of  men  ;  that 
the  manner  and  circumstances  in  which  the  doctrine  was 
promulgated  were  consonant  with  sound  reason  ;   that  all 

1  In  this  connection  it  is  worth  while  mentioning  a  striking  book  by- 
William  Wollaston,  The  Religion  of  Nature  Delineated,  published  in  1722. 
The  book  contains  no  attack  upon  revelation.  Indeed  toward  the  close 
the  author  expressly  disclaims  any  such  intent,  and  declares  '  That,  there- 
fore, which  has  been  so  much  insisted  on  by  me,  and  is  as  it  were  the 
burden  of  my  song,  is  so  far  from  undermining  true  revealed  religion,  that  it 
rather  paves  the  way  for  its  reception'  (fifth  edition  of  1735,  p.  211).  At 
the  same  time,  whether  this  caveat  was  sincerely  meant  or  not,  the  effect  of 
the  book  was  certainly  to  make  revelation  seem  less  necessary,  for  it  wa« 
devoted  to  showing  the  completeness  and  adequacy  of  natural  religion  under 
which  every  man  has  ability  and  light,  fully  commensurate  to  his  responsi- 
bility, and  hence  all  he  really  needs.  Wollaston's  contribution  to  th« 
subject  of  ethics,  novel  and  interesting  as  it  was,  cannot  b«  considered  here. 

O 


210  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

the  doctrines  of  Christianity  are  rational,  that  is,  though 
not  necessarily  discoverable  by  the  unaided  intellect,  when 
once  revealed  they  are  seen  to  be  in  harmony  with  its 
principles  ;  that  all  of  tl^em  have  a  tendency  to  reform 
men's  lives ;  and  finally,  |  that  Christianity  is  attested  by 
the  miracles  of  Christ,^  ^by  His  fulfilment  of  prophecy, 
and  by  the  witness  of  His  apostles  (Propositions  9  to  14). 
[AH  this  evidence  is  so  conclusive  according  to  Clarke,  that 
I  no  one  can  fail  to  recognise  Christianity  as  a  divine  revela- 
(^tion  unless  enslaved  by  his  lusts.  The  cause  of  unbelief 
r^  not  want  of  better  evidence,  but  wickedness  and  vice 
(I^oposition  15). 

(AH  these  men,  as  we  have  seen,  made  the  twofold  de- 
mand upon  religion  th^t  it  should  be  rational  and  that  it 
should  promote  virtue.  \No  religion,  however  well  attested 
by  supernatural  evidence,  can  possibly  claim  acceptance 
from  right-minded  men,  unless  its  teachings  accord  with 
sound  reason,  and  tend  to  establish  righteousness.  In- 
deed, sound  reason  recognises  virtue  as  the  principal  aim 
of  religion,  and  hence  no  faith  can  claim  to  be  rational 
unless  it  make  for  righteous  living.  The  effect  of  this 
upon  Christianity  was  to  reduce  the  traditional  system 
to  relatively  small  compass,  or  at  least  to  distinguish 
certain  elements  of  it  as  alone  essential.  What  this  led 
to  in  Tillotson  and  Locke,  we  have  already  seen.  They 
both  accepted,   apparently  without  much  question,   the 

1  Clarke's  definition  of  a  miracle  is  worth  quoting:  'And  now  from  these 
few,  clear  and  undeniable  Propositions,  it  evidently  follows :  First,  that 
the  true  definition  of  a  miracle,  in  the  theological  sense  of  the  word,  is  this, 
that  it  is  a  work  effected  in  a  manner  unusual,  or  different  from  the  common 
and  regular  method  of  Providence,  by  the  interposition  either  of  God  him- 
self or  of  some  intelligent  agent  superior  to  man  ;  for  the  proof  or  evidence 
of  some  particular  doctrine,  or  in  attestation  to  the  authority  of  some 
particular  person.  And  if  a  miracle  so  worked  be  not  opposed  by  some 
plainly  superior  power,  nor  be  brought  to  attest  a  doctrine  either  con- 
tradictory in  itself  or  vicious  in  its  consequences  (a  doctrine  of  which  kind 
no  miracles  in  the  world  can  be  sufficient  to  prove),  then  the  doctrine  so 
attested  must  necessarily  be  looked  upon  as  divine,  and  the  worker  of  the 
miracle  entertained  as  having  infallibly  a  commission  from  God'  {BoyU 
Lecture,  p.  384  sq. ). 


X.]  RATIONALISM  211 

greater  part  of  traditional  Protestantism,  but  they  were 
clear  that  its  essential  features  were  few,  and  that  the 
failure  to  recognise  this  was  responsible  for  much  of  the 
scepticism  and  irreligion  of  the  day.  In  1690  there  was 
published  by  Arthur  Bury,  Rector  of  Exeter  College, 
Oxford,  a  notable  tract  entitled  The  Naked  Gospel, 
which  is  very  significant  in  this  connection.  Nothing  in 
Christianity,  Bury  claims,  is  to  be  regarded  as  necessary 
unless  it  is  explicitly  set  forth  in  the  Bible  as  a  condition 
of  salvation.  Faith  in  Christ,  which  alone  is  so  required, 
means  not  accepting  this  or  that  doctrine  about  His  person 
and  w^ork — His  pre-existence.  His  deity.  His  incarnation. 
His  atonement — but  trusting  Him  as  one's  guide  in  the 
practical  conduct  of  life.  To  give  faith  a  value  in  and  of 
itself  is  to  obscure  the  gospel  and  make  it  ineffective  and 
misleading.  This  the  Catholics  have  done  in  demanding 
the  acceptance  of  so  many  things  which  have  no  bearing 
upon  virtue,  and  therefore  lead  a  man  away  from  the  real 
duties  of  life.  In  opposition  to  them,  as  to  many  Protest- 
ants, it  is  necessary  to  assert  the  simple  and  naked  gospel 
of  Jesus. 

In  this  little  work  we  have  an  illustration  of  an  attitude 
very  widespread  in  the  author's  day.  In  it  is  to  be  found 
the  explanation  of  the  deistic  controversy  which  made  so 
much  stir  in  the  later  years  of  the  seventeenth  and  during 
the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth  century.  That  controversy 
had  to  do  rather  with  practical  than  with  speculative 
questions,  with  moral  than  with  intellectual  difficulties. 
This  needs  to  be  realised  at  the  start  or  the  whole  deistic 
movement  will  be  misunderstood.  Like  most  of  their 
contemporaries,  the  Deists  were  interested  in  religion 
primarily  as  a  means  to  virtue,^  and  they  agreed  with 
Tillotson,  Locke,  and  Clarke  that  the  principles  of  virtue 

1  Shaftesbury  was  in  part  an  exception  to  this,  giving  religion  an  inde- 
pendent value  of  its  own,  like  aesthetics.  But  he  was  in  many  ways  prophetic 
of  a  new  age,  and  his  influence  was  felt  chiefly  in  the  classicist  morement  o£ 
the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  particularly  by  Herder. 


212  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

are  rooted  in  the  nature  of  man.  The  fundamental 
question,  therefore,  between  them  and  their  opponents 
was  whether  the  positive  duties  required  by  traditional 
Christianity,  based  as  they  were  upon  revelation  only, 
and  not  grounded  in  the  reason  of  things,  were  to  be  re- 
garded as  divinely  commanded,  and  hence  necessary  to 
salvation  and  godly  living.  Most  Christians  asserted  that 
they  were,  but  the  Deists  denied  it  on  the  twofold  ground 
that  the  general  assumption  that  God  might  be  expected 
to  enjoin  positive  duties  by  revelation,  and  the  claim  of 
Christianity  to  be  such  a  revelation,  were  alike  unfounded. 
It  is  important  to  examine  these  two  lines  of  argument  in 
some  detail. 

The  former  was  set  forth  by  Lord  Herbert  in  his  De 
Veritate,  and  particularly  in  his  De  Religione  Gentilium.^ 
According  to  him,  God's  perfection  demands  a  way  of 
salvation  open  and  common  to  all.  This  cannot  originate 
in  a  particular  revelation  which  in  the  very  nature  of  the 
case  is  not  shared  by  everybody.  It  must  be  implanted 
in  the  natural  reason  of  man,  and  be  equally  accessible 
in  all  ages  and  places.  Herbert  finds  a  way  of  salvation 
actually  known  by  the  wise  and  sagacious  among  all 
peoples.  Its  tenets  are  five  :  that  there  is  one  supreme 
God,  that  He  ought  to  be  worshipped,  that  virtue  is  the 
principal  part  of  worship,  that  we  ought  to  repent  of  our 
sins,  and  that  there  are  rewards  and  punishments,  both 
now  and  hereafter.  Wherever  men  have  used  their  reason 
they  have  discovered  these  great  truths,  which  constitute 
the  sum  of  natural  religion.  To  it  the  various  positive  faiths 
have  added  all  sorts  of  things  on  the  basis  of  alleged  revela- 
tions. The  rites  and  ceremonies,  and  the  other  additions 
found  in  these  religions,  are  commonly  due  to  the  machina- 
tions of  priests,  and  they  serve  in  every  case  only  to 
weaken  and  obscure  the  common  and  fundamental  truths. 

In  a  volume  entitled  The  Oracles  of  Reason,  published  in 

1  Published  posthumously  in  1 663 ;  English  translation,  1705. 


X.]  RATIONALISM  2X3 

1693  by  Charles  Blount  and  others,  the  tenets  of  natural 
religion  are  summarised  as  follows  :  that  there  is  one 
infinite,  eternal  God,  Creator  of  all  things,  that  He  governs 
the  world  by  His  providence,  that  it  is  our  duty  to  worship 
and  obey  Him,  that  worship  consists  in  prayer  and  praise, 
that  our  obedience  comprises  the  rules  of  right  reason 
whose  practice  is  moral  virtue,  that  we  are  to  expect 
rewards  and  punishments  hereafter,  and  that  when  we  err 
from  the  path  of  our  duty,  we  ought  to  repent  and  trust 
in  God's  mercy  for  pardon  (p.  197). 

In  this  work,  Blount  asserts  that  religion  consists  wholly 
in  morality,  which  means  the  imitation  of  God's  perfec- 
tions, and  not  obedience  to  positive  precepts  of  any  kind. 
God  is  not  to  be  worshipped  by  an  image,  by  sacrifice, 
or  by  a  mediator,  but  '  by  an  inviolable  adherence  in 
all  our  fives  to  all  the  things  which  are  just  by  nature, 
by  an  imitation  of  God  in  all  His  imitable  perfections, 
especially  His  goodness,  and  believing  magnificently  of  it ' 
(p.  88). 

The  most  complete  and  elaborate  presentation  of  this 
line  of  argument  is  found  in  the  famous  work  entitled 
Christianity  as  Old  as  the  Creation,  published  in  1730  by 
Matthew  Tindal,  Fellow  of  All  Souls  College,  Oxford. 
The  evil  of  demanding,  in  the  name  of  religion,  beliefs  and 
practices  in  themselves  morally  indifferent,  is  the  chief 
burden  of  this  book.  In  it,  Tindal  maintains,  on  a  priori 
grounds,  drawn  from  the  Justice,  goodness,  and  infinite 
perfection  of  God,  that  natural  religion  has  always  existed 
as  a  perfect  thing,  and  that  therefore  revelation  can  add 
nothing  to  it  (chap.  vi.).  All  additions  must  be,  not  only 
unnecessary,  but  false.  God's  great  end  in  the  creation 
and  government  of  the  world  is  not  His  own  glory  or  ad- 
vantage— for  He  is  in  want  of  nothing — but  the  good  of  His 
creatures  ;  and  hence  He  demands  nothing  of  them  which 
does  not  contribute  to  their  perfection  and  happiness. 
The  end  of  religion  is  morality — to  render  man  as  perfect 


214  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [cH. 

as  possible  in  all  moral  duties  (p.  39).  True  religion 
consists  '  in  a  constant  disposition  of  mind  to  do  all  the 
good  we  can,  and  thereby  render  ourselves  acceptable  to 
God  in  answering  the  end  of  our  creation '  (p.  18).  The 
only  difference  between  morality  and  religion  is  that  the 
former  is  '  acting  according  to  the  reason  of  things  con- 
sidered in  themselves/  while  the  latter  is  '  acting  according 
to  the  same  reason  of  things  considered  as  the  will  of  God  ' 
(p.  272).  That  things  merely  positive  should  be  made 
ingredients  of  religion  is  inconsistent  with  the  good  of  man- 
kind as  well  as  with  the  honour  of  God,  for  the  more  the 
mind  of  man  *  is  taken  up  with  the  observation  of  things 
which  are  not  of  a  moral  nature,  the  less  it  will  be  able  to 
attend  to  those  that  are  *  (p.  125).  To  imagine  that 
indifferent  matters  are  commanded  equally  with  matters 
of  morality  is  to  open  the  door  to  superstition,  cruelty, 
and  all  sorts  of  evil.^ 

In  thi§  connection  Tindal  quotes  from  Tillotson  a 
passage  to  the  same  effect  (p.  153),  but  his  conclusion  is 
more  thoroughgoing  than  the  archbishop's,  for  he  claims 
that  everything  is  superstitious  which  is  not  of  a  moral 
nature,  and  therefore  rejects  all  positive  enactments 
whatsoever,  while  Tillotson,  as  was  seen,  recognised  the 
obligation  of  certain  Christian  duties  of  a  morally  indif- 
ferent character.  Tindal  also  maintains,  in  disagreement 
with  Clarke,  and  with  Tillotson  and  Locke  as  well,  that 
miracles  can  be  no  proof  of  the  divine  origin  of  a  doctrine  ; 
the  only  proof  is  the  nature  of  the  doctrine  itself.  '  Every 
doctrine  that  carries  any  degree,  much  more  the  highest 

1  '  As  long  as  men  believe  the  good  of  society  is  the  supreme  law,  they  will 
think  it  their  duty  to  be  governed  by  that  law  ;  and  believing  God  requires 
nothing  of  them  but  what  is  for  the  good  of  mankind,  will  place  the  whole  of 
their  religion  in  benevolent  actions,  and  to  the  utmost  of  their  abilities  copy 
after  the  divine  original  ;  but  if  they  are  made  to  believe  there  are  things 
which  have  no  relation  to  this  good,  necessary  to  salvation,  they  must 
suppose  it  their  duty  to  use  such  means  as  will  most  eflFectually  serve  this 
purpose,  and  that  God,  in  requiring  the  end,  requires  all  those  means  as  will 
best  secure  and  propagate  it  And  'tis  to  this  principle  we  owe  the  moit 
cruel  penectttions,  inquisitions,  crusades,  and  massacres '  (p.  134). 


X.]  RATIONALISM  S16 

degree,  of  goodness  and  perfection  in  it,  has  tlie  character 
of  divinity  impressed  upon  it '  ;  and  '  duties  neither  need 
nor  can  receive  any  stronger  proof  from  miracles  than  what 
they  have  already  from  the  evidence  of  right  reason*^ 
(p.  342  ff.). 

The  supreme  duty  of  man  is  to  hve  in  such  a  way  as 
to  promote  the  public  good.  Benevolence  is  the  highest 
attribute,  both  in  God  and  man,  and  to  live  in  accordance 
with  its  dictates  is  to  fulfil  the  will  of  God.  *  To  imagine 
He  can  command  anything  inconsistent  with  this  uni- 
versal benevolence  is  highly  to  dishonour  Him  ;  'tis  to 
destroy  His  impartial  goodness,  and  make  His  power  and 
wisdom  degenerate  into  cruelty  and  craft '  (p.  63).  *  And, 
indeed,  power  and  knowledge  in  themselves  can't  engage 
our  love ;  if  they  could  we  should  love  the  devil  in  pro- 
portion to  His  power  and  knowledge.  'Tis  goodness 
alone  which  can  beget  confidence,  love,  and  veneration ; 
and  there  's  none  of  those  questions,  whether  relating  to 
God  or  man,  but  what  may  be  easily  determined  by 
considering  which  side  of  the  question  carries  with  it  the 
greatest  goodness  ;  since  the  same  light  of  nature  which 
shows  us  there  is  such  a  good  being,  shows  us  also  what 
such  goodness  expects'  (p.  66).  This  needs  no  revela- 
tion to  prove  it  true.  Reason  itself  leads  necessarily  to 
the  recognition  of  universal  love  and  kindness  as  the 
highest  duty  of  man,  in  whose  practice  consists  his  per- 
fection (cf.  pp.  66,  372). 

Tindal's  book  constituted  a  very  telling  argument  against 
the  common  Christian  assumption  of  the  day,  that  God 
demands  something  more  from  man  than  the  practice  of 
virtue,  and  that  true  rehgion  involves  and  salvation 
depends  upon  the  performance  of  duties  in  themselves 
morally  indifferent. 

But  the  Deists  did  not  content  themselves  with  the 

>  The  same  position  is  taken  by  Dr.  Thomas  Morgan  in  liis  Moral 
Philotopher  (1737),  p.  85  ft 


216  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

general  line  of  argument  described.  They  also  attacked 
directly  the  claim  of  Christianity  to  be  a  divine  revelation, 
some  turning  their  attention  to  the  Christian  evidences, 
others  to  the  content  of  the  Christian  system. 

It  has  been  seen  that  the  principal  evidences  of 
Christianity,  relied  upon  by  the  apologists  of  the  day  to 
prove  its  divine  origin,  were  prophecy  and  miracle.  In 
1722  there  was  published  a  curious  book  by  William 
Whiston,  who  had  been  for  a  few  years  Newton's  successor 
as  Professor  of  Mathematics  at  Cambridge,  but  had  lost 
his  professorship  because  of  heretical  views.  The  book 
was  entitled  An  Essay  toward  Restoring  the  True  Text 
of  the  Old  Testament,  and  for  Vindicating  the  Citations  made 
Thence  in  the  New  Testament*  In  this  work  Whiston 
maintained  that  the  fulfilment  of  Old  Testament  prophecy 
constituted  the  principal  proof  of  Jesus'  Messiahship,  and 
of  the  divine  origin  of  Christianity,  but  he  recognised  in 
certain  cases  a  lack  of  correspondence  between  prophecy 
and  alleged  fulfilment.  He  attempted  to  remedy  the 
difficulty  by  restoring  the  true  text  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which  he  claimed  had  been  intentionally  corrupted  by  the 
Jews.  Whiston's  work  was  made  the  occasion  of  an  acute 
and  telling  criticism  upon  the  evidence  from  prophecy 
by  Anthony  Collins.  In  1724  he  published  A  Discourse 
on  the  Grounds  and  Reasons  of  the  Christian  Religion,  in 
which  he  maintained  that  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy 
is  not  only  the  most  important,  but  the  only  proof  of 
the  divine  origin  of  Christianity.  If  the  evidence  from 
prophecy  be  invalidated,  Christianity  falls  to  the  ground. 
Its  one  essential  fact  is  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus,  and  this 
only  prophecy  can  prove.  Miracles  have  no  relation  to 
the  matter,  except  in  so  far  as  they,  too,  may  have  been 
foretold  (cf.  p.  37).  Collins  then  declared  that  the  lack  of 
correspondence  between  prophecy  and  fulfilment  which 
Whiston  had  noticed  in  some  cases  is  true  of  every  case, 
when  the  prophecies  are  literally  interpreted,  and  as  such 


X.]  RATIONALISM  217 

a  corruption  of  the  original  text,  as  Whiston  assumed,  does 
not  adequately  account  for  the  differences,  he  proposed 
to  meet  the  difficulty  by  interpreting  the  prophecies 
allegorically  (p.  39  ff.).  The  book  amounted  to  a  very 
severe  attack  upon  the  evidence  from  prophecy,  for  the 
allegorical  method  could  not  be  taken  seriously,  and  was 
not  meant  to  be  ;  and  in  a  second  book,  pubhshed  in  1727, 
entitled  The  Scheme  of  Literal  Prophecy  Considered,  it  was 
practically  abandoned,  and  the  assault  made  direct  and 
explicit.  The  seriousness  of  the  attack  was  widely  recog- 
nised, and  many  replies  were  published.  More  than 
thirty  of  them  are  mentioned  by  Collins  himself  in  the 
second  work  just  referred  to.  Some  of  the  replies  admitted 
his  contention  that  prophecy  is  the  principal  proof  of 
Christianity,  and  endeavoured  to  show  its  literal  fulfil- 
ment by  Jesus,  but  others  practically  gave  up  the  proof 
from  prophecy  and  staked  everything  on  miracles.  The 
result  of  the  controversy  was  decidedly  to  weaken  the  force 
of  the  prophetic  argument  and  to  lead  to  a  more  exclusive 
emphasis  upon  the  evidence  of  miracle. 

But  this  evidence  was  not  allowed  to  go  unchallenged. 
In  1727  a  former  Cambridge  Fellow,  Thomas  Woolston, 
who  had  anticipated  Collins  in  using  the  allegorical  method 
of  interpreting  the  Scriptures,^  and  had  seconded  him  in 
his  attack  upon  the  evidence  from  prophecy,^  came  out 
with  the  first  of  a  series  of  tracts  in  which  a  similar  method 
was  applied  to  the  miracles  of  Christ.  Woolston's  osten- 
sible purpose  was  to  recall  Christians  to  a  dependence  upon 
prophecy,  the  only  adequate  argument  for  Christianity. 
He  maintained  that  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  gospels 
were  quite  without  value  as  signs  or  testimonies  to  Christ's 

1  In  a  work  entitled  The  old  Apology  for  the  Truth  of  the  Christian 
Religion  against  the  Jews  and  OnitUes  Revived  (1705),  written  while  he 
was  still  a  Fellow  of  Sidney-Sussex  College,  Cambridge. 

2  In  a  racy  and  satirical  book  entitled  The  Moderator  between  an  Infdd 
and  an  Apostate  (1725),  in  which  Collins  was  denounced  and  ostensibly 
opposed  as  an  enemy  of  the  faith,  but  was  really  supported  in  his  attack 
upon  the  evidence  from  prophecy. 


218  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

divine  mission.^  Taken  literally,  indeed,  they  were  often 
not  miraculous  at  all,  and  were  in  most  cases  foolish, 
trivial,  contradictory,  absurd,  unworthy  of  a  divinely 
commissioned  teacher,  and  characteristic  rather  of  a 
sorcerer  and  wizard  (pp.  15,  66  ff.)-  They  have  value  only 
when  they  are  interpreted  allegorically,  as  the  Fathers 
interpreted  them,  and  are  understood  as  representations 
of  Christ's  spiritual  influence  and  operations  in  the  life 
of  mankind,  as  they  were  meant  to  be.^  Thus,  for  in- 
stance, the  reported  casting  of  devils  out  of  the  Gadarenes, 
and  sending  them  into  a  herd  of  swine,  is  interpreted  to 
mean  the  release  of  mankind  from  their  sins  by  Jesus 
and  the  entrance  of  evil  spirits  into  heretics  (First  Dis- 
course) ;  while  the  alleged  resurrection  of  Christ  is  only 
a  parable  setting  forth  the  liberation  of  Christianity  from 
the  bondage  of  the  Jewish  letter,  and  its  emergence  into 
the  freedom  of  the  Spirit  (Sixth  Discourse). 

Moreover,  Woolston  maintained  that  the  power  to  work 
physical  miracles,  even  if  it  were  granted  that  Jesus 
possessed  it,  would  be  no  proof  that  He  was  eminent  for 
piety,  virtue,  or  wisdom,  and  hence  a  messenger  from  God 
(First  Discourse,  p.  12).  Even  the  apologists  of  the  day 
recognise  that  miracles  have  been  performed  by  all  sorts 
of  persons,  often  under  demoniacal  instead  of  divine 
influence.  There  is,  therefore,  no  evidential  value  what- 
ever in  such  miracles,  even  if  their  reality  be  assumed. 

Woolston's  tracts,  of  which  half  a  dozen  appeared 
between  1727  and  1729,  were  coarse  and  scurrilous,  con- 
taining in  some  cases  shocking  language  concerning  the 

1  *  I  will  show  that  the  miracles  of  healing  all  manner  of  bodily  diseases 
which  Jesus  was  justly  famed  for  are  none  of  the  proper  miracles  of  the 
Messiah,  neither  are  they  so  much  as  a  good  proof  of  His  divine  authority  to 
found  a  religion'  (p.  4  ;  sixth  edition  of  1729). 

2  '  That  the  literal  history  of  many  of  the  miracles  of  Jesus  as  recorded  by 
the  Evangelists,  does  imply  absurdities,  improbabilities,  and  incredibilities  ; 
consequently  they  either  in  whole  or  in  part  were  never  wrought  as  they  are 
commonly  believed  nowadays,  but  are  only  related  as  prophetical  and 
parabolical  narratives  of  what  would  be  mysteriously  and  more  wonderfully 
done  by  Him '  (p.  4). 


i 


X.]  RATIONALISM  219 

works  and  teaching,  and  even  the  character  of  the  Jesus 
of  the  gospels,  but  at  the  same  time  they  were  often  very- 
ingenious,  acute,  and  witty,  and  it  is  not  surprising  that 
they  had  a  tremendous  circulation.  In  spite  of  their 
profane  character,  they  exposed  in  a  very  effective  manner 
the  artificial  nature  of  the  current  apologetic  and  the 
futility  of  using  the  miracles  of  Christ  for  evidential 
purposes. 

Woolston's  attack  upon  the  miracles  called  out  many 
replies,  notable  among  which  was  Bishop  Sherlocke's 
Trial  of  the  Witnesses  (1729)  in  defence  of  the  resurrection 
of  Christ.  He  and  others  were  abundantly  successful 
in  showing  the  groundlessness  of  Woolston's  accusation 
of  deliberate  conspiracy  to  deceive  on  the  part  of  Jesus 
and  His  disciples,  but  whatever  measure  of  success  may 
have  attended  their  defence  of  the  fact  of  the  resurrection, 
it  is  clear  enough  from  all  the  repHes  to  Woolston  that 
the  miracles  could  no  longer  be  appealed  to  with  the  same 
confidence  in  their  convincing  power. 

A  still  severer  blow  at  the  apologetic  value  of  miracles 
was  struck  by  David  Hume  in  his  celebrated  Essay  on 
Miracles,  published  in  1748.  In  order  to  understand  the 
significance  of  this  essay  it  is  necessary  to  remember  that 
the  term  miracle  was  employed  by  the  apologists  of  the 
day,  not  to  denote  any  wonderful  or  unique  or  otherwise 
unheard-of  event,  but  a  sign  wrought  for  the  purpose  of 
proving  the  authority  of  a  divine  messenger.  What 
Hume  was  chiefly  interested  to  show  was  not  the  impossi- 
bility of  a  miracle  understood  in  this  or  any  other  sense, 
nor,  as  is  commonly  supposed,  the  impossibility  of  proving 
a  miracle,  understood  as  a  unique  and  otherwise  unknown 
event,  but  the  impossibility  of  proving  such  an  event  in 
a  way  to  give  it  evidential  value.  In  other  words,  he  was 
interested  to  show  the  impossibility  of  proving  a  miracle 
in  the  strict  apologetic  sense  of  that  word  as  a  super- 
natural sign  wrought  to  establish  the  authority  of  a  divine 


220  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

messenger.  Most  of  the  replies  to  Hume,  made  in  his  own 
day  and  since,  have  entirely  misapprehended  the  real 
point  of  his  essay.  He  invited  misinterpretation  by  em- 
ploying the  word  miracle  in  different  senses,  and  also  by 
stating  the  real  point  of  his  essay  only  toward  the  close, 
after  he  had  devoted  the  greater  part  of  it  to  discrediting 
human  testimony  to  unusual  events.  The  impression 
was  thus  left  that  he  maintained  that  it  is  inherently  im- 
possible to  prove  such  events.  But  this  is  not  the  case, 
as  is  abundantly  shown  by  the  closing  sentence  of  the 
following  passage,  which  occurs  toward  the  end  of  the 
essay  :  '  Upon  the  whole  then  it  appears  that  no  testi- 
mony for  any  kind  of  miracle  has  ever  amounted  to  a 
probability,  much  less  to  a  proof  ;  and  that,  even  suppos- 
ing it  amounted  to  a  proof,  it  would  be  opposed  by  another 
proof  derived  from  the  very  nature  of  the  fact  which  it 
would  endeavour  to  establish.  It  is  experience  only 
which  gives  authority  to  human  testimony  ;  and  it  is  the 
same  experience  which  assures  us  of  the  laws  of  nature. 
When,  therefore,  these  two  kinds  of  experience  are  con- 
trary we  have  nothing  to  do  but  subtract  the  one  from 
the  other,  and  embrace  an  opinion  either  on  one  side  or  the 
other  with  that  assurance  which  arises  from  the  remainder. 
But,  according  to  the  principle  here  explained,  this  sub- 
traction with  regard  to  all  popular  religions  amounts  to 
an  entire  annihilation,  and  therefore  we  may  establish  it 
as  a  maxim  that  no  human  testimony  can  have  such  force 
as  to  prove  a  miracle,  and  make  it  a  just  foundation  for 
any  such  system  of  religion.  I  beg  the  limitations  here 
made  may  be  remarked  when  I  say  that  a  miracle  can 
never  be  proved  so  as  to  be  the  foundation  of  a  system  of 
religion.  For  I  own  that  otherwise  there  may  possibly 
be  miracles  or  violations  of  the  usual  course  of  nature  of 
such  a  kind  as  to  admit  of  proof  from  human  testimony  ; 
though,  perhaps,  it  will  be  impossible  to  find  any  such  in 
all  the  records  of  history.* 


X.]  RATIONALISM  121 

Critics  of  Hume  are  quite  right  in  saying  that  it  is  not 
necessarily  impossible  to  prove  a  miracle,  that  is,  they  are 
right  if  a  miracle  be  understood  simply  as  an  otherwise 
unheard-of  event  inexplicable  in  the  light  of  our  present 
knowledge.  But  Hume  was  really  concerned  primarily 
to  destroy  the  apologetic  value  of  miracles,  and  for  that 
purpose  his  argument  was  valid,  and  has  never  been 
successfully  refuted.  That  it  cannot  be  historically  proved 
that  any  particular  event  was  wrought  by  a  supernatural 
power  with  the  purpose  of  testifying  to  a  person's  divine 
commission  is  a  commonplace  among  historians  to-day. 
For  such  proof  assumes  a  complete  knowledge  of  all  possible 
natural  forces  which  may  have  operated  to  produce  the 
event,  a  knowledge  to  which  no  one  now  thinks  of  pre- 
tending. While  Hume's  essay  then  tended  to  throw  dis- 
credit upon  all  reports  of  wonderful  and  unusual  events, 
it  did  not  show  them  to  be  unprovable,  but  it  did  destroy 
the  apologetic  value  which  had  been  ascribed  to  them. 
Against  the  apologetic  position  of  the  day  Hume's  argu- 
ment was  really  final.  Miracles  had  been  regarded,  not 
simply  as  a  proof,  but  the  supreme  proof  of  Christianity. 
This  they  could  no  longer  be  where  his  essay  was  under- 
stood. 

Hume's  attack,  though  its  real  significance  was  not 
recognised,  and  though  the  general  impression  in  Christian 
circles  was  that  his  argument  had  been  successfully  re- 
futed by  the  many  who  replied  to  it,*  really  proved  very 
effective,  and  contributed  to  a  marked  shifting  of  emphasis 
in  Christian  apologetics.  On  the  one  hand,  apologists 
now  found  it  important  to  show  that  miracles  were  them- 
selves supported  by  an  antecedent  probability  in  their 
favour  drawn  from  the  necessity  and  nature  of  divine 
revelation.     Of    this    Paley's    Evidences    of    Christianity, 

^  Among  the  many  replies  that  appeared  in  Hume's  own  day  the  most 
important  were  Bishop  Douglas's  Criterion  (1752);  Dr.  Adams's  £ssay  on 
Mr.  Hume's  Essay  on  Miracles  (1752);  and  Dr.  Campbell's  Disurtation 
m  Miracles  (1762). 


222  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

which  appeared  almost  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth 
century  (1794),  offered  a  classical  illustration.  At  the 
beginning  of  the  work,  he  says,  '  In  what  way  can  a  revela- 
tion be  made  but  by  miracles  ?  In  none  which  we  are 
able  to  conceive.  Consequently  in  whatever  degree  it  is 
probable,  or  not  very  improbable,  that  a  revelation  should 
be  communicated  to  mankind  at  all ;  in  the  same  degree 
is  it  probable  or  not  very  improbable  that  miracles  should 
be  wrought.  Therefore  when  miracles  are  related  to  have 
been  wrought  in  the  promulgating  of  a  revelation  mani- 
festly wanted,  and  if  true  of  inestimable  value,  the  im- 
probability which  arises  from  the  miraculous  nature  of 
the  things  related  is  not  greater  than  the  original  im- 
probability that  such  a  revelation  should  be  imparted  by 
God.'  Thus  miracles,  while  still  used  to  support  Christian- 
ity, required  themselves  to  be  supported  by  other  evidence 
drawn  from  the  general  need  of  a  revelation,  and  from  the 
fitness  of  Christianity  to  meet  that  need.  And  so  their 
place  in  Christian  apologetic,  even  where  they  were  still 
retained,  was  altered  under  the  influence  of  Hume's  attack. 
On  the  other  hand,  apologists  felt  themselves  driven 
to  seek  other  and  stronger  evidence  for  the  divine  origin 
of  Christianity,  and  to  cease  staking  everything  upon 
miracle.  In  1776  appeared  a  very  significant  book  by 
Soame  Jenyns,  entitled  A  View  of  the  Internal  Evidences 
of  the  Christian  Religion,  in  which  prophecy  and  miracle 
were  minimised,  and  Christianity  was  proved  from  its 
character  alone.  Jenyns  says  at  the  beginning  of  his 
work,  '  The  miracles  recorded  in  the  New  Testament  to 
have  been  performed  by  Christ  and  His  apostles  were 
certainly  convincing  proofs  of  their  divine  commission 
to  those  who  saw  them  ;  and  as  they  were  seen  by  such 
numbers,  and  are  as  well  attested  as  other  historical 
facts ;  and  above  all,  as  they  were  wrought  on  so  great 
and  so  wonderful  an  occasion  they  must  still  be  admitted 
as  evidence  of  no  inconsiderable  force ;   but  I  think  they 


X.]  KATIONALISM  223 

must  now  depend  for  n  uch  of  their  credibility  on  the  truth 
of  that  rehgion  whose  credibiUty  they  were  first  intended 
to  support.  To  prove,  therefore,  the  truth  of  the  Christian 
rehgion,  we  should  begin  by  showing  the  internal  marks 
of  divinity  which  are  stamped  upon  it :  because  on  this 
the  credibihty  of  the  prophecies  and  miracles  in  a  great 
measure  depends  :  for  if  we  have  once  reason  to  be  con- 
vinced that  this  religion  is  derived  from  a  supernatural 
origin,  prophecies  and  miracles  will  become  so  far  from 
being  incredible,  that  it  will  be  highly  probable  that  a 
supernatural  revelation  should  be  foretold  and  enforced 
by  supernatural  means.'  Thus  Christianity  supported 
the  miracles  and  the  prophecies  instead  of  being  supported 
by  them,  and  the  method  of  Christian  apologetic  had 
undergone  a  radical  change,  the  effects  of  which  were  felt 
throughout  the  nineteenth  century.  In  view  of  this 
fact  it  is  clear  that  the  common  statement,  that  in  the 
controversies  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  Christian 
apologists  won  a  complete  victory,  is  far  from  true,  at 
least  so  far  as  the  question  of  the  evidences  is  concerned. 
They  were  actually  forced  to  take  their  stand  upon  a  new 
platform  altogether. 

Meanwhile  the  attack  upon  Christianity  took  the  form 
of  a  criticism,  not  only  of  its  evidence,  but  also  of  its 
contents,  particularly  the  Bible  and  traditional  theology. 
That  the  Christian  revelation  was  given  so  late  in  the 
history  of  the  world,  and  was  brought  to  the  knowledge 
of  so  small  a  portion  of  the  human  race  ;  that  it  narrowed 
the  conditions  of  salvation  set  up  by  natural  religion, 
requiring  things  in  themselves  morally  indifferent,  and 
thus  closing  the  door  to  many  virtuous  and  noble  men  of 
all  ages  and  nations ;  that  the  Old  Testament  is  full  of 
inconsistencies,  inaccuracies,  bad  ethics,  and  bad  theology  ; 
that  even  the  New  Testament  is  beset  in  less  degree  with 
the  same  difficulties ;  that  the  history  of  Christianity 
and  the  traditional  theology  of  the  Church  contain  much 


224  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

that  is  contradicted  by  sound  reason  and  morality — all 
this  was  emphasised  over  and  over  again.  One  of  the 
most  restrained  and  yet  effective  presentations  of  this 
kind  of  argument  is  found  in  the  thirteenth  and  longest 
chapter  of  Tindal's  Christianity  as  Old  as  the  Creation. 
In  it  he  criticises  both  Old  and  New  Testament  in  consider- 
able detail,  and  even  passes  some  strictures  on  the  preach- 
ing of  Jesus  Himself,  on  the  ground  that,  as  reported  in 
the  gospels,  it  is  often  extravagant,  impracticable,  and 
opposed  to  common  sense,  and  can  therefore,  in  many 
cases,  not  be  taken  literally  (p.  310  fE.).  Tindal  maintains, 
in  agreement  with  all  the  Deists,  that  the  only  safe  guide 
in  morality  and  religion  is  the  natural  reason.  This  must 
be  applied  also  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible,  and  only 
those  things  in  it  are  to  be  taken  for  divine  scripture, 
which  tend  to  the  honour  of  God  and  the  good  of  man. 
'  As  in  the  Old  Testament  there  are  several  things,  either 
commanded  or  approved,  which  would  be  criminal  in  us 
to  observe,  because  we  can't  reconcile  our  doing  this  with 
the  reason  of  things,  so  in  the  New  Testament  its  precepts 
are  for  the  most  part  delivered,  either  so  hyperbolically 
that  they  would  lead  men  astray  were  they  governed  by 
the  usual  meaning  of  the  words  ;  or  else  expressed  in  so 
loose,  general,  and  undetermined  a  manner  that  men  are 
as  much  left  to  be  governed  by  the  reason  of  things  as  if 
there  were  no  such  precepts :  And  the  Scripture  not 
distinguishing  between  those  precepts  which  are  occa- 
sional and  those  which  are  not,  we  have  no  way  to  dis- 
tinguish them  but  from  the  nature  of  things,  which  will 
point  out  to  us  those  rules  which  eternally  oblige,  whether 
delivered  in  Scripture  or  not '  (p.  322). 

It  has  generally  been  taken  for  granted,  upon  the  basis 
of  such  attacks  as  these,  and  in  view  of  the  reputation 
which  they  enjoyed  among  their  contemporaries,  that  the 
Deists  opposed  Christianity  altogether,  and  regarded  it 
as  wholly  evil  and  vicious.     This,  howev^,  is  a  great 


X.]  RATIONALISM  226 

mistake.  Many  of  them  may  have  thought  of  it  thus,  but 
some  of  the  most  notable  of  them  took  quite  a  different 
attitude.  The  title  of  Tindal's  principal  work  shows 
what  that  attitude  was — Christianity  as  Old  as  the  Creation 
— that  is  genuine  Christianity  is  identical  with  the  reUgion 
of  nature,  and  so  is  a  true,  not  a  false  religion.  Almost 
at  the  beginning  of  his  work  Tindal  states  his  purpose  in 
the  following  words  :  '  And,  therefore,  I  shall  attempt 
to  show  you,  That  Men,  if  they  sincerely  endeavour  to 
discover  the  will  of  God,  will  perceive,  that  there  's  a  law 
of  nature  or  reason  ;  which  is  so  called,  as  being  a  Law, 
which  is  common,  or  natural,  to  all  rational  Creatures ; 
and  that  this  Law,  like  its  Author,  is  absolutely  perfect, 
eternal,  and  unchangeable  ;  and  that  the  design  of  the 
Gospel  was  not  to  add  to,  or  take  from  this  Law  ;  but  to 
free  Men  from  that  load  of  Superstition,  which  had  been 
mixed  with  it :  so  that  True  Cliristianity  is  not  a  Religion 
of  yesterday,  but  what  God,  at  the  beginning,  dictated, 
and  still  continues  to  dictate  to  Christians,  as  well  as  others. 
If  I  am  so  happy  as  to  succeed  in  this  attempt,  I  hope,  not 
only  fully  to  satisfy  your  doubts,  but  greatly  to  advance 
the  honour  of  external  Revelation  ;  by  showing  the  perfect 
agreement  between  that  and  internal  Revelation ;  and 
by  so  doing,  destroy  one  of  the  most  successful  attempts 
that  has  been  made  on  Religion,  by  setting  the  Laws  of 
God  at  variance.  But  first,  I  must  premise,  That  in 
supposing  an  external  Revelation,  I  take  it  for  granted, 
that  there  's  sufficient  evidence  of  a  Person  being  sent 
from  God  to  publish  it ;  nay,  I  further  own,  that  this 
divine  Person  by  living  up  to  what  he  taught,  has  set  us 
a  noble  Example ;  and  that  as  he  was  highly  exalted  for 
so  doing,  so  we,  if  we  use  our  best  endeavours,  may  expect 
a  suitable  reward.  This,  and  everything  of  the  same 
nature,  I  freely  own,  which  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  Law 
of  God  being  the  same,  whether  internally,  or  externally 
revealed  '  (p.  7  ff.). 

P 


226  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

And  again,  on  p.  347,  he  says :  '  It  can*t  be  imputed 
to  any  defect  in  the  Light  of  Nature,  that  the  Pagan  World 
ran  into  idolatry,  but  to  their  being  entirely  governed  by 
Priests,  who  pretended  communication  with  their  Gods, 
and  to  have  thence  their  Revelations,  which  they  imposed 
on  the  credulous  as  divine  Oracles  :  Whereas  the  business 
of  the  Christian  dispensation  was  to  destroy  all  those 
traditional  Revelations,  and  restore,  free  from  all  Idolatry, 
the  true  primitive,  and  natural  Religion,  implanted  in 
Mankind  from  the  Creation.' 

Traditional  Christianity  is  far  removed  from  the  true 
religion  of  nature,  but  genuine  Christianity,  that  of  Christ 
Himself,  is  identical  with  it.  The  important  thing,  there- 
fore, is  to  distinguish  true  from  false  Christianity,  and  to 
accept  the  former  and  reject  the  latter.  '  If  this  be  true, 
have  I  not  shown  some  resolution,'  Tindal  asks,  '  in  daring 
to  attack  the  darling  weaknesses,  and  follies  of  false 
Christians  ;  in  proving  that  true  Christianity  is  so  far 
from  being  indefensible,  that  it  carries  its  own  evidences 
with  it ;  or  in  other  words,  all  its  Doctrines  plainly  speak 
themselves  to  be  the  will  of  an  infinitely  wise,  and  good 
God ;  as  being  most  friendly  to  society y  most  helpful  to 
government,  and  most  beneficial  to  every  individiml ;  or, 
in  one  word,  free  from  all  Priestcraft '  (p.  388).  To  those 
who  shared  his  position  in  this  matter,  Tindal  gave  the 
name  of  Cliristian  Deists  (p.  337),  showing  clearly  enough 
that  he  was  actuated,  not  by  hostility  to  Christianity  as 
such,  but  to  the  notion  that  it  involved  doctrines  and 
duties  not  founded  in  the  reason  and  nature  of  things. 

Tindal's  contrast  between  true  and  false  Christianity 
was  drawn  still  more  emphatically  by  Thomas  Chubb,  in 
a  work  entitled  The  True  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  Asserted  * 
(1738).     In  this  work  it  is  maintained  that  Jesus'  aim  was 

^  Chnbb  was  a  tradesman  without  university  education,  but  with  con- 
siderable acuteness  and  skill  as  a  controversialist.  He  wrote  exteniively 
upon  religious  subjects. 


X.]  EATIONALISM  227 

to  save  men's  souls,  that  is,  '  to  prepare  men  for  and  to 
insure  them  the  favour  of  God  and  their  happiness  in 
another  world,  and  to  prevent  them  from  bringing  great 
and  lasting  misery  upon  themselves '  (p.  1).  To  this  end 
He  proposed  for  their  acceptance  certain  truths  which  were 
fitted  to  aSect  their  hves,  and  these  truths  constitute  the 
gospel.  '  The  important  truths  which  Christ  has  thus 
recommended  to  public  consideration  may  be  summed  up 
in  the  following  particulars.  First,  He  requires  and 
recommends  the  conforming  our  minds  and  lives  to  that 
eternal  and  unalterable  rule  of  action,  which  is  found  in 
the  reason  of  things  (which  rule  is  summarily  contained 
in  the  written  word  of  God),  and  this  He  lays  down  as  the 
only  ground  of  divine  acceptance,  and  as  that  which  will 
entitle  men  to  the  favour  of  God  and  the  happiness  of 
another  world ;  and  consequently  this  will  prevent  them 
from  being  greatly  and  lastingly  miserable.  Secondly, 
if  men  have  lived  in  a  violation  of  this  righteous  law,  by 
which  they  have  rendered  themselves  highly  displeasing 
to  God,  and  worthy  of  His  resentment ;  then  Christ 
requires  and  recommends  repentance  and  reformation  of 
their  evil  ways  as  the  only  and  the  sure  ground  of  the 
divine  mercy  and  forgiveness.  And  thirdly,  in  order  to 
make  those  truths  have  the  greater  impression  on  the 
minds  and  hves  of  men,  He  declares  and  assures  them  that 
God  has  appointed  a  day  in  which  He  will  judge  the  world 
in  righteousness,  and  that  He  will  then  either  acquit  or 
condemn,  reward  or  punish  them,  according  as  they  have 
or  have  not  conformed  their  minds  and  lives  to  that  rule 
of  righteousness  before  mentioned,  and  according  as  they 
have  or  have  not  repented  and  amended  their  evil  ways. 
This  is  the  true  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  this  is  the  way 
and  method  which  Christ  has  taken  to  save  men's  souls ' 
(p.  18  ff.).  'I  would  also  desire  my  reader  to  observe 
that  our  Lord  Christ  did  not  propose  or  point  out  to  men 
any  new  way  to  God's  favour  and  eternal  Hfe,  but  on  the 


228  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [cH. 

contrary,  He  recommended  that  good  old  way  which  always 
was,  and  always  will  be,  the  true  way  to  hfe  eternal ;  viz. 
the  keeping  the  commandments,  or  the  loving  God  and  our 
neighbour,  which  is  the  same  thing,  and  is  the  sum  and 
substance  of  the  moral  law.  This  plain  pathway  to  heaven 
lay  neglected,  and  for  the  most  part  unfrequented ;  men, 
both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  having  forsaken  the  fountain 
of  living  water  that  is  the  true  way  to  life  eternal ;  and 
hewTi  for  themselves  cisterns,  broken  cisterns,  that  can 
hold  no  water  ;  that  is,  they  had  found  out  new  and  false 
ways  of  recommending  themselves  to  God's  favour.  And 
this  rendered  our  Saviour's  undertaking  and  ministry  so 
much  the  more  needful '  (p.  30).  The  tract  is  devoted 
largely  to  the  establishment  of  this  thesis,  and  to  the  exhibi- 
tion of  the  contrast  between  traditional  Christianity  and 
the  gospel  of  Jesus,  with  the  practical  aim  of  enforcing  the 
obligation  of  virtuous  living.^ 

The  same  general  position  appears  clearly  set  forth  in 
Dr.  Thomas  Morgan's  Moral  Philosopher  (1737).  Morgan 
was  a  physician,  who  had  been  at  one  time  a  dissenting 
clergyman.  He  called  himself  a  Christian  Deist,  and 
understood  Christianity  to  be  '  a  revival  of  the  religion 
of  nature ;  in  which  the  several  duties  and  obligations 
of  moral  truth  and  righteousness  are  more  clearly  stated 
and  explained,  enforced  by  stronger  motives,  and  encour- 
aged with  the  promises  of  more  effectual  aids  and  assist- 
ances by  Jesus  Christ,  the  great  Christian  prophet,  than 
ever  has  been  done  before  by  any  other  prophet,  moralist, 
or  law-giver  in  religion  '  (p.  392). 

To  claim  that  such  men  as  Tindal,  Chubb,  and  Morgan 
were  opposed  to  Christianity,  and  were  trying  to  destroy 
it,  is  to  misrepresent  them  altogether.     They  did  not  deny 

1  A  similar  assertion  of  the  identity  of  true  Christianity  with  the  religion 
of  nature,  and  a  similar  emphasis  of  the  contrast  between  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  and  the  tenets  of  traditional  Christianity  are  found  frequently  in  Lord 
Bolingbroke's  Works,  for  instance,  rol.  v.  pp.  204  ft,,  689  ft  (Mallet's  edition 
of  1793). 


X.]  RATIONALISM  229 

that  Je3us  was  a  divine  messenger,  or  that  Christianity- 
is  a  true  reUgion.  They  denied  only  that  the  additions 
to  the  reUgion  of  nature,  the  many  positive  precepts  which 
mark  traditional  Christianity,  were  of  divine  origin.  They 
were  doing  exactly  what  Locke  and  Tillotson  and  Bury 
and  many  others  had  long  been  doing,  attempting  to 
distinguish  the  essential  and  the  non-essential  in  Christian- 
ity, with  the  design  of  promoting  true  morality  and  re- 
ligion, and  doing  away  with  the  superstitions  of  the  tra- 
ditional Christian  system  which  so  commonly  interfered 
with  both. 

The  tremendous  interest  of  most  of  the  Deists  in  the 
public  good,  and  their  hostility  to  selfishness  and  self- 
seeking,  are  very  noticeable.  In  our  own  day  similar 
attempts  to  distinguish  between  the  true  and  the  false 
in  Christianity  with  the  like  purpose  of  promoting  the  good 
of  humanity,  or  as  it  is  commonly  said,  of  establishing  the 
kingdom  of  God  in  the  world,  are  made  by  men  who  are 
within  the  Christian  Church,  and  regard  themselves  as 
genuine  Christians.  This  should  throw  light  upon  the 
situation  in  the  eighteenth  century,  and  lead  us  to  speak 
at  least  of  some  of  the  Deists  as  defenders  rather  than 
opponents  of  Christianity.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  differ- 
ence between  them  and  the  avowed  apologists  was  far  less 
than  has  commonly  been  supposed.  There  was  a  vital 
kinship  between  them,  more  significant  than  any  differ- 
ences. They  were  upon  opposite  sides  in  the  religious 
controversy,  not  so  much  because  of  any  great  disagree- 
ment in  religious  beliefs  and  in  ethical  ideals,  as  because  of 
a  difference  of  attitude  toward  the  ecclesiastical  establish- 
ment and  the  ecclesiastical  authorities.  A  common  note 
running  through  all  the  deistic  writings  was  hostihty  to, 
or  impatience  with,  both.  The  bigotry  and  intolerance 
of  organised  Christianity  were  denounced  as  severely  as 
its  superstitions  and  misplaced  emphases.  Many  of  the 
apologists   reoognised  clearly,  and  admitted  frankly,  the 


230  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KA.NT         [ch. 

evils  arising  from  priestcraft  and  sacerdotalism,  and  tried 
earnestly  to  broaden  the  religious  platform  and  to  promote 
the  spirit  of  toleration,  but  organised  Christianity  meant 
too  much  to  them  to  be  rejected  on  account  of  its  existing 
evils,  and  they  put  up  with  them  and  stood  by  the  institu- 
tion as  the  Deists  were  unwilling  to  do. 

The  writings  of  Tindal,  Chubb,  and  Morgan,  particu- 
larly Tindal's  Christianity  as  Old  as  the  Creation,  called 
forth  many  replies,  in  which  positions  similar  to  those  of 
Tillotson,  Locke,  and  Clarke  were  reasserted  more  or  less 
consistently.  Of  all  these  the  best  and  clearest  was  by 
John  Conybeare,  Rector  of  Exeter  College,  Oxford,  en- 
titled A  Defense  of  Revealed  Religion  against  the  Exceptions 
of  a  Late  Writer  in  his  Book  Intituled  Christianity  as  Old 
as  the  Creation,  etc.  (1732).  The  book  contains  a  strong 
and  effective  argument  against  Tindal's  a  priori  con- 
ception of  religion  as  a  perfect  thing  always  and  every- 
where the  same,  but  in  general  it  is  nothing  more  than  a 
restatement  of  the  old  position  against  which  Tindal 
protested.  Natural  religion  is  true  and  good  so  far  as  it 
goes,  but  it  does  not  go  far  enough.  Men  need  more  light 
than  can  be  gained  from  it,  and  so  revelation  has  come  to 
supplement  it,  and  adds  to  the  requirements  of  the  natural 
law  positive  doctrines  and  precepts,  morally  indifferent 
in  themselves,  but  binding  upon  all  to  whom  a  knowledge 
of  the  revelation  is  brought.  By  their  acceptance  and  by 
their  practice,  virtue,  the  ultimate  end  of  all  true  religion, 
is  forwarded,  not  hindered.  The  authority  of  the  Christian 
revelation,  in  which  these  requirements  are  taught,  is 
supported  by  prophecy,  by  miracles,  and  by  the  testimony 
of  the  primitive  records.  It  is  evident  that  for  Conybeare, 
— and  there  were  many  others  like  him — the  rational- 
istic platform  still  stood  intact. 

Upon  some  men,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Deists'  exalta- 
tion of  natural  religion,  and  their  assertion  of  its  univer- 
Bality  and  perfection,  had  the  effect  of  producing  a  reaction 


X.]  RATIONALISM  S81 

against  the  whole  notion  of  natural  religion,  and  of  leading 
to  a  denial  of  its  claims.  The  result  was  that  deism  was 
followed  by  scepticism,  and  the  doubt  thrown  by  the 
Deists  upon  Christianity  was  now  thrown  by  others  upon 
natural  religion  itself,  that  is,  upon  all  religion.  This 
sceptical  attitude  was  promoted,  or  at  any  rate  fore- 
shadowed, among  others  particularly  by  four  writers,  two 
of  them  Christian  apologists,  and  two  of  them  sceptics. 
They  wrote  from  very  different  points  of  view,  the  first 
two  with  the  aim  of  defending  Christianity,  but  the 
tendency  of  all  their  works  was  to  break  doT\Ti  rational 
religion  in  general,  and  so  to  promote  scepticism. 

The  first  of  them  was  William  Law,  the  famous  non- 
juror and  mystic,  who  published  in  1731  a  reply  to  Tindal 
with  the  title  The  Case  of  Reason  or  Natural  Religion  fairly 
and  fully  stated  in  Answer  to  a  Book  entitled  Christianity 
as  Old  as  the  Creation.  In  this  book  Law  rejected 
completely  the  common  assumption  of  both  Deists  and 
apologists  that  a  revelation  claiming  to  be  divine  must 
approve  itself  to  the  reason  of  man.  God's  character 
and  will  are  unfathomable,  and  we  are  quite  unable  tc 
judge  what  is  right  or  wrong,  true  or  untrue,  antecedently 
to  divine  revelation.  Nothing  is  good  or  evil  in  itself, 
only  the  will  of  God  makes  it  so,  and  consequently  only 
by  revelation  can  we  know  what  is  right  and  what  is 
wrong.  '  A  revelation  is  to  be  received  as  coming  from 
God,  not  because  of  its  internal  excellence,  or  because  we 
judge  it  to  be  worthy  of  God  ;  but  because  God  has  de- 
clared it  to  be  His  in  as  plain  and  undeniable  a  manner  as 
He  has  declared  creation  and  providence  to  be  His.  For 
though  no  revelation  can  come  from  God  but  what  is  truly 
worthy  of  Him  and  full  of  every  internal  excellence  ;  yet 
what  is  truly  worthy  of  God  to  be  revealed  cannot  possibly 
be  known  by  us,  but  by  revelation  from  Himself.  And  as 
we  can  only  know  what  is  worthy  of  God  iu  creation  by 
knowing  what  He  has  created  ;  so  we  can  in  no  other  way 


232  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

possibly  know  what  is  worthy  of  God  to  be  revealed  but 
by  a  revelation '  (p.  101). 

But  how  can  we  know  whether  an  alleged  revelation  be 
divine  or  not  ?  Only  by  the  external  proofs  of  prophecy 
and  miracle.  '  The  credibility,  therefore,  of  any  external 
divine  revelation  with  regard  to  human  reason,  rests  wholly 
upon  such  external  evidence,  as  is  a  sufficient  proof  of  the 
divine  operation  or  interposition.  ...  I  appeal,  therefore, 
to  the  miracles  and  prophecies  on  which  Christianity  is 
founded,  as  a  sufficient  proof  that  it  is  a  divine  revelation  ' 
(p.  107).  *  It  seems,  therefore,  to  be  a  needless  and  too 
great  a  concession  which  some  learned  divines  make  in 
this  matter,  when  they  grant  that  we  must  first  examine 
the  doctrines  revealed  by  miracles,  and  see  whether  they 
contain  anything  in  them  absurd  or  unworthy  of  God, 
before  we  can  receive  the  miracles  as  divine.  For  where 
there  can  be  nothing  doubted,  nor  any  more  required,  to 
make  the  miracles  sufficiently  plain  and  evident,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  about  the  truth  and  goodness  of  the 
doctrine  which  they  attest.  Miracles  in  such  a  state  as 
this  are  the  last  resort ;  they  determine  for  themselves 
and  cannot  be  tried  by  anything  further '  (p.  109).  '  A 
course  of  plain  undeniable  miracles  attesting  the  truth  of 
a  revelation  is  the  highest  and  utmost  evidence  of  its 
coming  from  God,  and  not  to  be  tried  by  our  judgments 
about  the  reasonableness  or  necessity  of  its  doctrines' 
(p.  110). 

This  is,  of  course,  the  completest  possible  repudiation 
of  the  position  of  Tillotson,  Locke,  and  all  the  other  rational 
theologians  of  the  day,  apologists  as  well  as  Deists.  In 
the  presence  of  omnipotence  manifested  by  the  perform- 
ance of  miracles,  man  must  be  dumb  and  submit  without 
question.  To  pass  judgment  upon  the  teaching  so  accre- 
dited, to  examine  it  in  order  to  see  whether  it  is  rational 
and  good,  is  to  set  oneself  above  God  and  coromit  the  worst 
of  all  sins.     *  If  sin  had  its  beginning  from  pride,  and  hell 


X.]  RATIONALISM  233 

be  the  effect  of  it ;  if  devils  are  what  they  are  through 
spiritual  pride  and  self-conceit ;  then  we  have  great  reason 
to  believe  that  the  claiming  this  authority  to  our  reason 
in  opposition  to  the  revealed  wisdom  of  God  is  not  a 
frailty  of  flesh  and  blood,  but  that  same  spiritual  pride 
which  turned  angels  into  apostate  spirits  '  (p.  60). 

It  is  interesting  to  notice  that  in  his  effort  to  defend 
revelation,  Law  anticipated  Butler's  famous  argument 
that  natural  religion  and  the  natural  course  of  events  in 
general  are  beset  with  as  many  difficulties,  and  are  en 
shrouded  in  as  impenetrable  mysteries  as  Christianity 
itself,  and  therefore  if  these  difficulties  and  mysteries  do 
not  prevent  our  believing  in  divine  creation  and  provi- 
dence, they  should  not  hinder  our  faith  in  revealed  religion 
(cf.  pp.  66, 103  ff.).  Such  a  line  of  argument  was,  of  course, 
fraught  with  danger,  suggesting,  as  it  could  hardly  help 
doing,  the  abandonment  both  of  Deism  and  of  Christianity. 
Law's  criticism  of  Tindal's  exaggerated  estimate  of  human 
reason,  and  of  his  a  priori  construction  of  natural  religion, 
acute  and  forceful  as  it  was,  could  only  have  the  effect  of 
undermining  the  common  religious  platform  of  the  day, 
and  driving  men,  either  to  find  an  altogether  new  basis 
of  religious  faith,  or  to  content  themselves  with  thorough- 
going scepticism. 

Of  similar  import  was  Butler's  famous  Analogy  of 
Religion,  Natural  and  Revealed,  to  the  Constitution  and 
Course  of  Nature,  which  appeared  in  1736.  Butler's  work, 
as  indicated  by  the  title,  consisted  of  two  parts,  the  first 
dealing  with  natural,  and  the  second  with  revealed  re- 
ligion, and  the  two  parts  had  very  different  readers  in  view. 
In  the  first  the  existence  of  God  and  the  creation  of  the 
world  by  Him  are  assumed  Tvdthout  argument,  and  it 
is  then  maintained  that  there  are  grounds  for  supposing 
that  His  government  of  the  world  is  moral,  and  that  there 
will  be  a  future  life  in  which  virtue  and  vice  will  be  re- 
spectively rewarded  and  punished.     Butler  does  not  claim 


234  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

that  there  ia  adequate  proof  for  this  conclusion,  but  only 
that  the  objections  commonly  brought  against  it  are  in- 
valid, and  that  the  likelihood  of  its  being  true  is  sufficient 
to  Justify  the  prudent  man  in  proceeding  as  if  it  were. 
No  harm  will  result  if  he  should  be  mistaken  in  the  assump- 
tion, while  on  the  other  hand,  if  he  act  as  if  it  were  not 
true,  he  may  suffer  serious  consequences  in  another  life 
(Part  I.,  conclusion).  The  general  tone  of  the  argument 
is  not  at  all  uplifting.  The  appeal  to  prudential  considera- 
tions has  a  degrading  sound  and  contrasts  unpleasantly 
with  the  loftier  and  more  disinterested  motives  urged, 
for  instance,  by  Shaftesbury  and  Tindal.  It  must,  how- 
ever, be  recognised  that  it  was  addressed  only  to  a  particu- 
lar class  of  persons,  and  those  not  the  deistic  or  sceptical 
writers  of  the  day — with  such  the  argument  could  have 
little  force — but  to  the  frivolous  and  immoral  who  took 
for  granted,  when  they  thought  of  it  at  all,  that  there  is  a 
God,  but  did  not  seriously  consider  the  practical  conse- 
quences of  such  a  belief.  The  argument,  in  fact,  is  to  be 
judged  as  a  practical  moral  sermon  addressed  to  the  care- 
less and  indifferent  rather  than  as  an  apology  addressed 
to  the  serious  thinkers  of  the  day.^ 

The  second  part  of  the  work  bears  a  very  different 
character.  It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  the  two  were 
conceived  originally  as  parts  of  one  whole.  The  second 
has  a  direct  bearing  upon  the  deistic  controversy,  and  was 
called  forth  by  it,  while  the  first  faces  a  different  situation 
altogether.  One  might  be  tempted  to  think  that  the 
second  part  was  planned  first,  and  that  the  use  of  a  similar 
method  to  meet  frivoHty,  immorality  and  irreligion  was  an 
afterthought.  It  is  the  second  part,  at  any  rate,  which 
alone  has  historic  significance  in  the  development  of  re- 
ligious thought  in  England.     It  had  its  place  in  the  great 

1  Compare  the  remark  in  part  ii.  chap.  viii. :  *  The  design  of  this  treatise 
is  not  to  vindicate  the  character  of  God,  but  to  show  the  obligations  of  men ; 
it  is  not  to  justify  His  providence,  but  to  show  what  belongs  to  as  t«  do.' 


X.3  RATIONALISM  236 

controversy  of  the  day,  and  apologetic  as  its  intention  was, 
it  constituted  a  step  in  the  evolution  of  deism  into  scepti- 
cism-. The  general  position  of  the  author  is  negative.  The 
power  of  human  reason  to  judge  conclusively  in  religious 
matters  is  denied.  Man  does  not  know  the  whole  course 
of  nature,  and  so  cannot  tell  what  God  must  do  in  any 
given  circumstances,  or  what  qualities  must  mark  a  divine 
revelation.  Seeming  irrationality  is  no  argument  against 
a  revelation,  for  even  natural  religion  is  not  free  from  it. 
The  only  ground  for  rejecting  it  would  be  its  immoral 
tendencies,  and  even  here  it  might  contain  things  which, 
taken  by  themselves  and  apart  from  the  whole  scheme  of 
divine  government,  would  offend  our  moral  sense.  '  Upon 
supposition  that  God  exercises  a  moral  government  over 
the  world,  the  analogy  of  His  natural  government  suggests 
and  makes  it  credible  that  His  moral  government  must  be 
a  scheme  quite  beyond  our  comprehension,  and  this  affords 
a  general  answer  to  all  objections  against  the  justice  and 
goodness  of  it '  (Part  I.  chap.  vii.).  '  And,  therefore, 
though  objections  against  the  evidence  of  Christianity 
are  most  seriously  to  be  considered,  yet  objections  against 
Christianity  itself  are,  in  a  great  measure,  frivolous ; 
almost  all  objections  against  it,  excepting  those  which 
are  alleged  against  the  particular  proofs  of  its  coming  from 
God.  I  express  myself  with  caution,  lest  I  should  be 
mistaken  to  vilify  reason ;  which  is,  indeed,  the  only 
faculty  we  have  wherewith  to  judge  concerning  anything, 
even  revelation  itself,  or  be  misunderstood  to  assert,  that 
a  supposed  revelation  cannot  be  proved  false  from  internal 
characters.  For  it  may  contain  clear  immoralities,  or 
contradictions,  and  either  of  these  would  prove  it  false. 
Nor  will  I  take  upon  me  to  affirm  that  nothing  else  can 
possibly  render  any  supposed  revelation  incredible.  Yet 
still  the  observation  above  is,  I  think,  true  beyond  doubt, 
that  objections  against  Christianity,  as  distinguished  from 
objections  against  its  evidence,  are   frivolous'  (Part  n. 


236  PKOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch 

chap.  iii.).  '  And  now  what  is  the  Just  consequence  from 
all  these  things  ?  Not  that  reason  is  no  judge  of  what  is 
offered  to  us  as  being  of  divine  revelation.  For  this  would 
be  to  infer  that  we  are  unable  to  judge  of  anything,  because 
we  are  unable  to  judge  of  all  things.  Reason  can,  and  it 
ought  to,  judge,  not  only  of  the  meaning,  but  also  of  the 
morality  and  the  evidence  of  revelation.  First,  it  is  the 
province  of  reason  to  judge  of  the  morality  of  the  Scrip- 
ture ;  i.e.  not  whether  it  contains  things  different  from 
what  we  should  have  expected  from  a  wise,  just,  and  good 
Being  ;  for  objections  from  hence  have  been  now  obviated  : 
but  whether  it  contains  things  plainly  contradictory  to 
wisdom,  justice,  or  goodness  ;  to  what  the  light  of  nature 
teaches  us  of  God.  And  I  know  nothing  of  this  sort 
objected  against  Scripture,  excepting  such  objections  as 
are  formed  upon  suppositions,  which  would  equally  con- 
clude that  the  constitution  of  nature  is  contradictory  to 
wisdom,  justice,  or  goodness,  which  most  certainly  it  is 
not.  Indeed  there  are  some  particular  precepts  in  Scrip- 
ture given  to  particular  persons,  requiring  action  which 
would  be  immoral  and  vicious  were  it  not  for  such  pre- 
cepts. But  it  is  easy  to  see  that  all  these  are  of  such  a 
kind,  as  that  the  precept  changes  the  whole  nature  of  the 
case  and  of  the  action,  and  both  constitutes  and  shows 
that  not  to  be  unjust  or  immoral  which,  prior  to  the  pre- 
cept, must  have  appeared  and  really  have  been  so  ;  which 
may  well  be,  since  none  of  these  precepts  are  contrary 
to  immutable  morality.  If  it  were  commanded  to  culti- 
vate the  principles,  and  act  from  the  spirit  of  treachery, 
ingratitude,  cruelty,  the  command  would  not  alter  the 
nature  of  the  case  or  of  the  action  in  any  of  these  instances. 
But  it  is  quite  otherwise  in  precepts  which  require  only 
the  doing  an  external  action  ;  for  instance,  taking  away 
the  property  or  life  of  any.  For  men  have  no  right  to 
either  life  or  property,  but  what  arises  solely  from  the  grant 
of  God  :  when  this  grant  is  revoked,  they  cease  to  have  any 


X.  RATIONALISM  237 

right  at  all  in  either ;  and  when  this  revocation  is  made 
known,  as  surely  it  is  possible  it  may  be,  it  must  cease  to 
be  unjust  to  deprive  them  of  either.  And  though  a  course 
of  external  acts,  which  without  command  would  be  im- 
moral, must  make  an  immoral  habit,  yet  a  few  detached 
commands  have  no  such  natural  tendency.  I  thought  pro- 
per to  say  thus  much  of  the  few  Scripture  precepts,  which 
require,  not  vicious  actions,  but  actions  which  would  have 
been  vicious,  had  it  not  been  for  such  precepts ;  because 
they  are  sometimes  weakly  urged  as  immoral,  and  great 
weight  is  laid  upon  objections  drawn  from  them '  (ibid.). 

Thus  Butler  did  not  go  as  far  as  Law  in  this  matter,  and 
reject  altogether  the  competency  of  reason  in  religious 
matters,  but  he  reduced  it  to  narrow  limits  and  denounced 
the  common  rationalistic  dependence  on  it  as  unjustified. 

The  contention  of  Butler  was  a  very  effective  rejoinder 
to  the  thesis  of  Tindal,  that  natural  rehgion  is  a  complete 
and  perfect  thing,  and  therefore  nothing  can  be  added  to 
it  by  revelation.  As  against  this  a  priori  conclusion 
Butler's  argument  has  a  very  scientific  and  modern  sound, 
but  it  is  a  dangerous  weapon  cutting  both  ways  at  once. 
It  may  actually  remove  one's  difficulties  concerning 
Christianity,  as  Butler  intended  it  should,  or  it  may  lead 
to  the  conviction  that  both  Christianity  and  natural 
religion  are  equally  irrational,  and  thus  turn  Deists  into 
sceptics.  Against  this  result  Butler's  positive  argument 
for  Christianity  from  prophecy  and  miracle,  which  he  called 
the  direct  and  fundamental  proofs  of  the  Christian  rehgion, 
was  not  a  sufficient  safeguard.  Here,  too,  his  position 
was  negative  rather  than  positive.  The  ordinary  pre- 
sumption urged  against  miracles  is  not  sufficient  to  render 
them  incredible.  They  are  recounted  in  the  same  way 
that  the  rest  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  history  is, 
and  the  burden  of  proof  is  upon  him  who  would  reject 
them.  Such  a  treatment  of  the  matter  was  hardly  enough 
to  give  them  strong  evidential  value. 


238  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [cBL 

In  connection  with  his  discussion  of  the  improbability 
of  miracles,  Butler  betrayed  a  singular  lack  of  logical 
insight,  hardly  in  keeping  with  his  usual  sagacity.  *  First 
of  all,  there  is  a  very  strong  presumption  against  common 
speculative  truths,  and  against  the  most  ordinary  facts 
before  the  proof  of  them,  which  yet  is  overcome  by  almost 
any  proof.  There  is  a  presumption  of  millions  to  one 
against  the  story  of  Caesar,  or  of  any  other  man.  For 
suppose  a  number  of  common  facts  so  and  so  circumstanced, 
of  which  one  had  no  kind  of  proof,  should  happen  to  come 
into  one's  thoughts,  every  one  would,  without  any  possible 
doubt,  conclude  them  to  be  false.  And  the  like  may  be 
said  of  a  single  common  fact ;  and  from  hence  it  appears, 
that  the  question  of  importance,  as  to  the  matter  before 
us,  is  concerning  the  degree  of  the  peculiar  presumption 
supposed  against  miracles ;  not  whether  there  be  any 
peculiar  presumption  at  all  against  them.  For  if  there  be 
the  presumption  of  millions  to  one  against  the  most 
common  facts,  what  can  a  small  presumption  additional 
to  this  amount  to,  though  it  be  peculiar  ?  It  cannot  be 
estimated,  and  is  as  nothing  '  (Part  n.  chap.  ii.  §  3). 

The  confusion  shown  here  between  what  Mill  called 
improbability  before  the  fact  and  improbability  after  the 
fact  is  so  gross  as  to  do  little  credit  to  the  author  of  the 
Analogy.  It  is  not  unlike  the  confusion  of  thought  which 
led  him  over  and  over  again  to  take  the  answering  of  ob- 
jections to  a  proposition  for  a  positive  argument  in  its 
favour.  This,  in  spite  of  his  frequent  protestations,  and 
the  exceeding  modesty  of  his  claims,  Butler  was  in  reality 
continually  doing. 

The  Analogy,  as  a  whole,  shows  great  penetration  and 
keenness,  and  is  filled  with  profound  observations  and 
striking  aphorisms.  The  reader  is  conscious  throughout 
of  being  in  contact  with  a  mind  of  uncommonly  fine  fibre. 
But  as  an  apology,  either  for  natural  or  revealed  religion, 
it    is    extraordinarily   weak,    and    the   line   followed    in 


X.]  RATIONALISM  239 

it  has  been  pursued  by  no  important  apologist  since. 
This  is  not  because  the  work  was  so  effectively  done  as 
not  to  need  repeating,  but  because  it  was  too  dangerous 
in  its  results.  The  actual  effect  of  the  book  upon  Butler's 
contemporaries  we  do  not  know,  for,  singularly  enough, 
though  in  the  nineteenth  century  it  was  reckoned  among 
the  greatest  of  all  apologetic  writings,  and  was  widely 
used  for  apologetic  purposes,  both  in  England  and  America, 
we  hear  almost  nothing  of  it  in  Butler's  own  day.  The 
ambiguous  character  of  the  argument  was  evidently 
realised.  It  was  calculated  to  meet  admirably  a  particu- 
lar situation,  but  it  met  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  imperil  the 
larger  issue,  and  so  was  ill-adapted  for  general  and  perma- 
nent use.  That  it  later  gained  such  a  vogue  was  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  English-speaking  religious  world  had  travelled 
far  from  the  platform  of  the  early  eighteenth  century,  and 
had  lost  all  appreciation  of  what  the  work  really  involved. 
With  such  effectiveness  as  it  may  have  had  in  the  im- 
mediate situation  which  called  it  forth  vanished  also  its 
noxious  quahty  for  the  average  mind,  and  it  remained  an 
interesting  and  stimulating  piece  of  dialectic,  fitted  to 
whet  the  logical  faculty  of  students,  and  as  such  it  main- 
tained until  very  recently  its  place  and  its  value  in  the 
curriculum  of  many  a  college. 

It  would  be  unjust  to  Butler  to  judge  him  by  the 
Analogy  alone.  Of  far  greater  historical  importance  were 
his  sermons  on  human  nature,  in  which  he  made  a  real 
contribution  to  the  subject  of  ethics.  His  analysis  of  the 
moral  nature  of  man  and  his  discussion  of  moral  motives 
are  very  suggestive,  and  of  great  significance.  But  all 
this  belongs  to  another  field,  and  must  not  be  further 
pursued  here. 

Of  similar  effect  to  Butler's  Analogy,  so  far  at  least  as 
concerned  the  rationalistic  platform  of  the  day,  was  a 
striking  and  acute  httle  book  by  Henry  Dodwell,  the 
younger,  entitled  Christiariify  not  founded  on  Argument, 


240  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

and  the  Tme  Principle  of  Gospel  Evidence  Assigned,  which 
was  published  in  1742.  In  the  form  of  a  letter  addressed 
to  a  student  at  Oxford,  it  struck  a  severe  blow  at  the  very- 
heart  of  the  rational  theology  of  the  day,  both  orthodox 
and  deistic.  Dodvvell  maintains  that  religious  faith  has 
no  relation  to  reason.  To  try  to  support  it  on  rational 
grounds  is  to  promote  scepticism.  The  foundation  of 
religion  is  acquiescence  and  belief ;  the  foundation  of 
philosophy  is  doubt ;  and  to  try  to  found  religious  truth 
on  argument  is  to  invite  scepticism  and  irreligion.  '  Re- 
ligion will  not  admit  of  the  least  alliance  with  reason '  * 
(p.  81).  We  must  deny  our  reason  '  to  give  our  faith  scope  ' 
(p.  84).  The  Roman  Catholic  principle  of  infallibility, 
absurd  as  it  is,  is  much  to  be  preferred  to  the  folly  of 
allowing  all  men  to  judge  for  themselves,  and  yet  expecting 
them  to  beheve  the  same  things  (p.  92  ff.).  Religion 
demands  immediate  and  unquestioning  faith,  faith  in  the 
unseen,  not  in  the  seen,  in  the  unproved,  not  in  what  has 
been  demonstrated.  The  only  power  to  bring  us  to 
reHgious  faith  is  the  Holy  Spirit  (p.  56).  The  miracles  of 
Christ  and  His  apostles  were  not  meant  as  arguments ; 
they  were  simply  acts  of  benevolence,  and  have  no  evi- 
dential value.  Only  the  continued  miracle  of  a  Uving 
divine  witness  in  our  own  breasts  can  be  the  basis  of  Chris- 
tian faith  (p.  60).  '  My  son,  trust  thou  in  the  Lord  with  all 
thine  heart,  and  lean  not  unto  thine  own  understanding  ' 
is  the  quotation  with  which  the  book  closes.  Like  the 
books  of  Law  and  Butler,  it  represented  an  abandonment 
of  the  rationalistic  platform,  but  it  was  even  more  con- 
sistent and  thoroughgoing  than  they.  It  insisted  upon 
the  rejection,  not  only  of  rational  proof,  but  also  of  the 
external  evidence  of  prophecy  and  miracle,  and  based 
everything  upon  the  inner  illumination  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Unlike  Law  and  Butler,  Dodwell  wrote  with  a  sceptical 
purpose,  but  his  book  was  calculated  to  produce  a  similair 
I  I  quote  from  the  second  edition  of  1743, 


X.]  RATIONALISM  241 

eSect,  either  to  drive  men  into  complete  scepticism,  or  to 
lead  them  to  find  some  other  basis  for  faith  than  human 
reason  and  testimony.  In  other  words,  it  was  calculated 
in  either  case  to  break  down  the  common  rational  platform 
of  the  day.^ 

The  sceptical  tendency  found  its  clearest  and  completest 
expression  in  three  wTitings  by  David  Hume,  his  Essay 
on  Providence  and  a  Future  State  (1748),  his  Dialogues 
Concerning  Natural  Religion  (written  in  1751,  but  not 
published  until  after  his  death  in  1779),  and  his  Natural 
History  of  Religion  (1757).  All  of  these  were  directed, 
not  against  Christianity  particularly,  but  against  natural 
religion  in  general  as  understood  in  that  day,  and  were 
therefore  sceptical,  not  deistic  in  their  purpose. 

In  the  brief  essay  on  Providence  and  a  Future  State, 
Hume  contends  that  from  given  effects  we  can  argue  only 
a  cause  sufficient  to  produce  them.  Having  observed  that 
the  present  world  is  imperfect,  we  have  no  right  to  assume 
an  infinite  creator,  and  then  conclude  that  being  perfect 
He  will  yet  produce  a  perfect  world.  Having  observed  that 
in  this  hfe  rewards  and  punishments  are  not  distributed 
in  exact  accordance  with  human  deserts,  we  have  no  right 
to  conclude  that  there  must  be  a  future  life  in  which  they 
will  be  so  distributed.  '  That  the  divinity  may  possibly 
be  endowed  with  attributes  which  we  have  never  seen 
exerted ;  may  be  governed  by  principles  of  action,  which 
we  cannot  discover  to  be  satisfied  :  all  this  will  freely  be 
allowed.  But  still  this  is  mere  possibility  and  hypothesis. 
We  never  can  have  reason  to  infer  any  attributes,  or  any 
principles  of  action  in  him,  but  so  far  as  we  know  them  to 
have  been  exerted  and  satisfied.     "  Are  there  any  marks 

1  In  replies  to  Dodwell's  book  by  Philip  Doddridge  {Three  Letters 
Theological,  1742)  and  Jolm  Leland  (Remarks  on  a  Late  Pamphlet  Entitled 
Christianity  not  Founded  on  Argument,  1744),  while  the  rational  proof  of 
Christianity  was  still  given  the  chief  place,  emphasis  was  put  also  upon  the 
convincing  force  of  the  inner  spiritual  experience  of  the  Christian,  thus 
showing  the  influence  of  Dodwell's  attack,  and  foreshadowing  a  positioD 
which  later  became  general  under  the  influence  of  evangelicalism. 

Q 


242  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

of  a  distributive  justice  in  the  world  ?  "  If  you  answer 
in  the  affirmative,  I  conclude,  that,  since  Justice  here 
exerts  itself,  it  is  satisfied.  If  you  reply  in  the  negative, 
I  conclude,  that  you  have  then  no  reason  to  ascribe  Justice, 
in  our  sense  of  it,  to  the  gods.  If  you  hold  a  medium 
between  affirmation  and  negation,  by  saying,  that  the 
justice  of  the  gods,  at  present,  exerts  itself  in  part,  but  not 
in  its  full  extent :  I  answer,  that  you  have  no  reason  to 
give  it  any  particular  extent,  but  only  so  far  as  you  see  it 
at  present  exert  itself  ^  (p.  140). 

In  the  Dialogues  on  Natural  Religion,  the  ontological, 
cosmological,  and  teleological  arguments  for  God's  exist- 
ence are  successively  attacked.  The  universe  may  be 
self-existent  as  well  as  its  cause.  We  have  no  right  to 
argue  from  the  analogy  of  a  finite  cause  to  the  cause  of  the 
universe,  and  assume  a  mind  back  of  it,  for  the  universe  is 
a  unique  effect.  Order  may  belong  to  matter  as  well  as 
to  mind,  and  hence  order  may  be  natural  and  self-caused. 
From  a  finite  world  we  could  argue  at  best  only  a  finite 
cause.  Assuming  that  the  universe  had  an  author,  he  may 
have  been  a  bungler,  or  a  god  since  dead,  or  a  male  and 
female  god,  or  a  multipHcity  of  gods.  He  may  have  been 
perfectly  good  or  perfectly  evil,  or  a  mixture  of  good  and 
evil,  or  morally  quite  indifferent — the  last  hypothesis  being 
the  most  probable. 

The  work  is  obscure  and  involved,  suggestive  rather 
than  systematic  as  a  dialogue  is  apt  to  be,  but  it  con- 
stituted an  exceedingly  effective  attack  upon  the  common 
rational  arguments  for  the  existence  of  God. 

The  third  work  was  historical  rather  than  polemic  in 
form,  but  it  was  also  destructive  of  the  natural  theology 
of  Hume's  day.     The  common  deistic  notion  that  natural 

1  It  is  interesting  to  notice  the  agreement  at  this  point  with  the  contention 
of  Law  and  Butler,  that  we  have  no  right  to  make  a  priori  statements  about 
God  and  His  providence.  We  can  judge  only  in  the  light  of  what  be  actually 
does.  Throughout  his  argument  it  is  probable  that  Hume  had  Butler 
particnlArly  in  mind. 


X.]  RATIONALISM  243 

religion  is  a  perfect  thing,  existing  everywhere  alike,  is 
shown  to  be  entirely  erroneous.  Polytheism  is  more 
primitive  than  monotheism.  The  latter  is  a  later  and 
artificial  development,  and  has  proved  worse  for  the  world 
than  polytheism,  because  of  the  intolerance  always  as- 
sociated with  it. 

As  an  account  of  the  development  of  religion,  Hume's 
work  was  crude  enough,  but  it  was  prophetic  of  a  new 
method  of  dealing  with  religious  questions,  and  as  against 
the  assumptions  of  Tindal  and  other  eighteenth-century 
exponents  of  natural  religion,  both  deistic  and  orthodox, 
it  was  conclusive. 

It  is  often  asserted  that  in  the  controversy  of  the 
eighteenth  century  in  England  the  victory  was  won  by 
the  orthodox  apologists  over  both  Deists  and  sceptics. 
Nothing  could  be  further  from  the  truth.  The  victory 
was  won,  so  far  as  there  was  any  victory  at  all,  over  both 
the  orthodox  apologists  and  the  Deists  by  the  sceptics, 
of  whom  Hume  was  the  greatest.  They  may  not  have 
promoted  largely  the  vogue  of  scepticism  in  England,  but 
they  drove  both  apologists  and  Deists  from  their  tradi- 
tional position,  and  broke  down  the  authority  and  credit 
of  the  rational  school.  That  religious  faith  and  devotion 
still  survived  and  flourished  was  due,  not  to  the  apologists, 
but  to  altogether  different  influences,  of  which  the  great 
evangeUcal  revival  was  the  most  important. 

n.  In  France 

The  rationalism  which  found  so  clear  an  expression  and 
underwent  so  interesting  a  development  in  England, 
voiced  it?elf  also  in  France,  and  that  partly  under  English 
influence,  though  ultimately  in  still  more  radical  forms. 
Of  the  rational  supematuralism  of  Tillotson,  Locke,  and 
others,  there  was  very  Uttle  in  eighteenth-century  France, 
but  of  deism  there  was  a  great  deal.    The  position  of 


244  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [oh. 

Voltaire  is  typical,  and  finds  characteristic  expression  in 
the  following  passage  from  the  conclusion  of  his  work  on 
Bolingbroke.  '  Every  man  of  sense,  every  good  man, 
ought  to  hold  the  Christian  sect  in  horror.  The  great 
name  of  theist,  which  is  not  sufficiently  revered,  is  the 
only  name  one  ought  to  take.  The  only  gospel  one  ought 
to  read  is  the  great  book  of  nature,  written  by  the  hand  of 
God  and  sealed  with  his  seal.  The  only  religion  that 
ought  to  be  professed  is  the  religion  of  worshipping  God 
and  being  a  good  man.  It  is  as  impossible  that  this  pure 
and  eternal  religion  should  produce  evil,  as  it  is  that  the 
Christian  fanaticism  should  not  produce  it.'  * 

Voltaire  did  not  draw  the  distinction  drawn  by  Tindal, 
Chubb,  and  Morgan  between  the  gospel  of  Jesus  and  the 
traditional  Christian  system.  It  was  not  a  purified 
Christianity  that  he  wished  to  substitute  for  the  current 
system.  On  the  contrary,  he  desired  to  get  rid  of 
Christianity  altogether,  both  the  thing  and  the  name. 
'  The  true  religion  brings  peace,  Jesus  came  to  bring  not 
peace,  but  a  sword '  (ibid.).  These  words  sufficiently 
reveal  his  attitude  toward  Jesus  Himself.  In  estimating 
his  position  in  this  matter  and  that  of  his  countrymen, 
it  must  be  remembered  that  Christianity  was  known  in 
France  only  in  the  form  of  a  bigoted,  intolerant,  and  un- 
enlightened Romanism.  Of  a  liberal  and  more  or  less 
rationalistic  Protestantism,  such  as  existed  in  England, 
there  was  none  at  all. 

Voltaire's  hostility  to  Christianity  did  not,  however, 
mean  hostility  to  religion.  *  But  what ! '  he  says  in  his 
Dictionnaire  Philosophique,  '  because  we  have  chased  away 
the  Jesuits,  is  it  necessary  to  chase  away  God  ?  *  On 
the  contrary,  it  is  necessary  to  love  Him  the  more '  (art. 
Dieu).  And  again,  '  Faith  consists  in  believing  what 
seems  false.    To  believe  in  a  wise  creator,  eternal,  and 

1  I  quote  from  the  •dition  of  Voltaire's  Works  published  by  Armand 
Aubrie,  Paris,  1829. 


X.]  KATIONALISM  245 

supreme,  is  not  faith,  it  is  reason'  (art.  Foi).  *In  the 
opinion  that  there  is  a  God,  there  are  difficulties  ;  but 
in  the  contrary  opinion  there  are  absurdities '  [Traite  de 
Mitaphysique,  p.  22).  Moreover,  while  in  private  life 
it  is  possible  to  do  without  a  belief  in  God,  it  is  not  possible 
in  public  life.  Immorality  and  anarchy  are  sure  to  follow 
if  a  nation's  religious  faith  is  destroyed.  And  yet  it  is 
better  to  have  no  God  than  a  cruel  and  barbarous  one ; 
atheism  is  to  be  preferred  to  intolerance  and  bigotry 
(art.  Athee). 

Voltaire  was  thus  a  believer  in  God  and  in  natural  re- 
hgion,  but  he  was  at  the  same  time  a  bitter  and  uncom- 
promising foe  of  superstition  and  illiberalism.  He  was  also 
an  ardent  champion  of  humanitarianism,  and  he  did  much, 
both  by  word  and  deed,  to  awaken  the  conscience  of  France 
to  the  injustice  and  cruelty  and  indifference  to  others' 
welfare,  which  were  so  marked  in  the  life  of  the  age.^ 

One  of  the  most  beautiful  expressions  of  Deism  or 
natural  religion  to  be  found  in  all  hterature  is  the  pro- 
fession of  faith  of  the  Savoyard  vicar,  in  the  Emile  of 
Voltaire's  contemporary,  Rousseau.  The  spirit  of  it  is 
very  different  from  that  of  Voltaire.  There  is  no  bitter- 
ness or  sharp  hostility  to  the  existing  Christian  system, 
and  the  simple,  inner,  emotional,  and  even  mystical 
character  of  religion  is  emphasised,  so  that  we  are  no 
longer  moving  in  the  sphere  of  pure  rationalism.  But  in 
general  the  construction  of  natural  religion  and  the  argu- 
ments urged  to  support  it  are  the  same  as  in  the  rational 
school  of  the  day.  '  My  son,  keep  your  spirit  always  in 
such  a  state  as  to  desire  that  there  be  a  God,  and  you  will 
never  doubt  it.  And  then,  whichever  side  you  may  take, 
believe  that  the  true  duties  of  religion  are  independent 
of  the  institutions  of  men ;    that  a  just  heart  is  the  true 

1  Compare  Dictionnaire  Fhilosophique,  art.  Th^sme :  '  What  is  a  true 
theist  ?  It  is  one  "who  says  to  God  I  adore  you  and  I  serve  you ;  it  is  one 
▼ho  says  to  th«  Turk,  the  Chinaman,  the  Indian,  and  the  Russian  I  lore 
jon.' 


246  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

temple  of  divinity  ;  that  in  every  country  and  every  sect 
to  love  God  above  all  else,  and  one's  neighbour  as  oneself, 
is  the  sum  of  the  law ;  that  there  is  no  religion  which 
dispenses  one  from  the  duties  of  moraUty  ;  that  there  are 
no  essentials  but  these  ;  that  the  worship  of  the  heart  is 
the  first  of  these  duties,  and  that  without  faith  there  is  no 
true  virtue '  ^  (p.  339).  '  I  converse  with  Him  ;  I  permeate 
all  my  faculties  with  His  divine  essence  ;  I  wait  upon 
His  benefactions  ;  I  bless  Him  for  His  gifts  ;  but  I  do  not 
pray  to  Him.  What  should  I  demand  of  Him  ?  That  He 
should  change  the  course  of  events  for  me  ;  that  He  should 
perform  miracles  in  my  favour  ?  I,  who  ought  above  all 
to  love  the  order  established  by  His  wisdom  and  main- 
tained by  His  providence,  should  I  desire  that  this  order 
be  disturbed  for  me  ?  No,  this  rash  wish  would  merit 
punishment  rather  than  praise.  Nor  do  I  ask  of  Him  the 
power  of  doing  right.  Why  should  I  ask  of  Him  what  He 
has  bestowed  upon  me  ?  Has  he  not  given  me  conscience 
to  love  the  right,  reason  to  know  it,  liberty  to  choose  it  ? 
If  I  do  wrong  I  have  no  excuse  ;  I  do  it  because  I  desire  to. 
To  ask  him  to  change  my  will  is  to  ask  of  Him  what  He 
asks  of  me ;  is  to  wish  that  He  would  do  my  work,  and 
that  I  might  receive  the  reward.  Not  to  be  satisfied 
with  my  state  is  to  wish  that  I  were  not  a  man  ;  is  to  wish 
something  else  than  that  which  is  ;  is  to  wish  disorder  and 
evil.  Source  of  justice  and  of  truth  !  God  merciful  and 
good  !  In  my  confidence  in  Thee,  the  supreme  wish  of  my 
heart  is  that  Thy  will  be  done  '  (p.  297).  '  Yes,  if  the  life 
and  the  death  of  Socrates  were  those  of  a  sage,  the  life  and 
death  of  Jesus  were  those  of  a  God.  Shall  we  say  that  the 
gospel  history  was  invented  at  will  ?  My  friend,  it  is  not 
thus  that  one  invents  ;  and  the  deeds  of  Socrates,  which 
no  one  doubts,  are  less  well  attested  than  those  of  Jesus 
Christ.  .  .  .  The  gospel  contains  marks  of  truth  so  great, 

1  I  have  used  the  edition  of  the  (Euvres  Choisies  de  Jecm  Jacques  Rousseau, 
publislMd  hj  Fleischer,  Leipsic,  1617. 


X.]  BATIONALISM  247 

80  striking,  so  perfectly  inimitable,  that  the  inventor  of 
them  would  be  more  extraordinary  than  the  hero.  With 
it  all,  this  same  gospel  is  full  of  incredible  and  irrational 
things,  which  it  is  impossible  for  a  man  of  sense  either  to 
conceive  or  admit.  WTiat  shall  one  do  in  the  midst  of  all 
these  contradictions  ?  Be  always  modest  and  circum- 
spect, my  child.  Respect  in  silence  that  which  you  can 
neither  reject  nor  comprehend,  and  humble  yourself  before 
the  great  Being,  who  alone  knows  the  truth  '  (p.  331). 

The  religion  of  nature  defended  by  Voltaire,  and  in  a 
very  different  spirit  by  Rousseau,  seemed  to  many  of 
their  contemporaries  only  another  form  of  superstition 
and  bigotry,  and  in  the  latter  part  of  the  century  Deism 
was  largely  displaced  by  atheism.  D'Holbach's  Systeme 
de  la  Nature  (1770)  is  the  most  complete  and  systematic 
expression  of  the  general  spirit. 

m.  In  Germany 

In  Germany  the  rationalistic  tendency  was  promoted 
particularly  by  the  Leibnitz- Wolffian  philosophy,  which 
made  clearness  and  reasonableness  the  sole  marks  of  truth. 
That  is  possible  which  involves  no  contradiction,  and  that 
is  actual  for  which  there  exists  a  clear  and  sufficient  reason 
why  it  should  be  so,  and  not  otherwise.  Under  this  influ- 
ence there  developed  toward  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
century  a  rational  supematuralism  similar  to  that  of  Locke 
and  others  in  England,  though  the  philosophy  underlying 
it  was  very  different.  There  was  the  same  idea  that 
natural  religion  is  good  as  far  as  it  goes,  but  needs  supple- 
menting by  divine  revelation,  which  may  impart  truths 
above  reason,  but  not  in  any  way  out  of  accord  therewith. 
In  1738  Shaftesbury's  Characteristics,  and  in  1741  Tindal's 
Christianity  as  Old  as  the  Creation,  were  put  into  German, 
and  were  followed  by  translations  of  many  other  English 
books,  both  radical  and  conservative.    From  that  time 


248  PEOTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT  [ch. 

on  the  influence  of  English  rationalism,  and  particularly 
of  English  Deism  was  widely  felt,  and  had  the  effect  of  pro- 
moting more  extreme  views  in  the  German  religious  world. 
One  of  the  most  important  representatives  of  the  genuine 
deistic  position  was  Reimarus,  a  Hamburg  philologist, 
who  published  apologies  for  natural  religion  against 
materialism  and  atheism,^  and  left  in  manuscript  an  attack 
upon  Christianity ,2  fragments  of  which  were  published 
by  Lessing  in  1774  ff.  under  the  title  of  WolfenbilUel 
Fragments.^  These  contained  a  sharp  criticism  of  the 
notion  of  revealed  religion  in  general,  and  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testament  in  particular.  Reimarus  agreed  with 
orthodox  Christians  that  Christianity  and  the  Bible  stand 
or  fall  together.  He  therefore  believed,  as  they  did,  that 
an  attack  upon  the  Bible  was  an  attack  on  Christianity. 
Lessing,  on  the  other  hand,  in  editing  the  fragments, 
maintained,  as  Tindal,  Chubb,  and  Morgan  had  done, 
that  the  two  are  to  be  distinguished.  Christianity  is  older 
and  other  than  the  historic  records  that  recount  its  origin, 
and  the  severest  criticism  of  them  does  not  affect  it  in  the 
least.  Its  essence  lies,  not  in  book  or  dogma,  but  in 
character.  It  consists  simply  in  love,  and  the  man  who 
loves  his  neighbour  is  the  true  Christian.*  Historic 
Christianity,  like  all  positive  religions,  is  only  a  stage  in 
the  evolution  of  the  highest  spiritual  religion — in  the 
education  of  the  race  which  God  has  been  carrying  on 
since  the  beginning  of  human  life.^  In  the  supreme  and 
final  religion,  the  essence  of  all  true  religion,  which  is  one 
with  Christianity  itself,  will  exist  freed  from  the  temporary 
limitations  and  entanglements  which  have  so  generally 
prevented  its  understanding  and  hindered  its  influence. 

1  Die  Vornehmsten    Wahrheiten  der  natHrlichen  Religion  (1754);    Die 
Vemunftlehre  (1756). 
>  Apologie  oder  Schutzschrift  fur  die  Vernuvftigen  Verehrer  Gottes. 

*  Other  fragments  of  this  work  were  published  in  the  Zeitschrift  fait 
historische  Theologie,  1850-1852. 

*  Cf.  Testaiiient  des  Johanries  and  Nathan  der  Weite. 

*  See  his  Ermohung  des  Menschengeschlechts. 


X.]  KATIONALISM  249 

Like  Rousseau,  Lessing  was  much  more  than  a  mere 
rationalist.  His  conception  of  revelation  as  God's  con- 
tinuous education  of  the  race  is  alone  sufficient  to  prove 
this.  He  was  prophetic  of  a  new  age  which  found  in  him 
one  of  its  greatest  foreruimers.  But  this  lies  beyond  the 
horizon  of  the  present  volume.  It  is  only  as  an  exponent 
of  the  type  of  rationaUsm  which  distinguished  the  essence 
of  Christianity  from  its  historic  manifestation,  and  identified 
the  former  with  *  the  religion  of  all  good  men  ' — the  true 
religion  of  nature — that  we  are  concerned  with  him  here.^ 

The  classical  expression  was  given  to  German  rational- 
ism of  a  non-supernatural  type  by  the  philosopher  Kant, 
in  his  famous  work  on  Religion  within  the  Bounds  of  Mere 
Reason.^  Religion  is  the  recognition  of  one's  duties  as 
commands  of  God.  Where  we  must  know  a  thing  to  be 
the  will  of  God  before  we  regard  it  as  our  duty,  we  have 
revealed  religion  ;  where  we  know  it  as  our  duty  before  we 
recognise  it  as  the  will  of  God,  we  have  natural  religion. 
A  religion  made  up  only  of  tenets  discoverable  by  human 
reason  is  self- vindicating,  but  if  composed  only  of  revealed 
truths  it  will  disappear,  if  the  tradition  of  its  origin  be  lost. 
But  even  a  revelation,  if  it  is  to  gain  any  credence,  must 
contain  some  rational  tenets,  and  hence  Kant  considers 
Christianity  under  the  two  heads  of  natural  and  revealed 
reUgion.  He  finds  that  it  is  a  perfect  natural  religion, 
because  it  inculcates  the  law  of  love  to  God,  which  means 
duty  for  duty's  sake,  and  love  for  one's  neighbour,  which 
means  disinterested  service.  And  its  precepts  are  enforced 
by  the  perfect  example  of  Jesus.  It  needs  no  other  sup- 
port, neither  prophecy  nor  miracle ;  it  is  rational  and  self- 
vindicating.     As  a  revealed  religion  Christianity  contains 

1  In  addition  to  Lessing's  notes  on  the  Wolfenbiittel  Fragments,  see  also 
Mne  Duplik,  Axiomata^  and  anti-Goeze  which  were  called  out  by  the 
controversy  oyer  the  FragTnents  ;  also  the  unfinished  Das  Christenthum  der 
Vemunft  and  Entstehwng  der  geoffenharten  Religion ;  Beweis  des  Geistes 
und  der  Kraft ;  Das  Testament  Johannis ;  Nathan  der  Weise ;  and 
£rziehung  des  MenschtTigeschUchts. 

*  Rdigion  innerhaU)  der  Grenzcn  der  Uossen  Vtnvun/t,  1793. 


250  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [ch. 

positive  precepts,  which  are  legitimate  only  in  so  far  as 
they  make  the  duties  of  natural  religion  clearer,  or  enforce 
them  more  strongly.  As  an  end  in  themselves  they  are 
wholly  evil.  The  notion  that  we  can  do  anything  to 
please  God,  except  to  live  rightly,  is  superstition.  And  to 
suppose  that  we  can  distinguish  works  of  grace  from 
works  of  nature  is  a  delusion.  All  such  supematuralism 
lies  beyond  our  ken.  There  are  three  common  forms  of 
superstition — the  behef  in  miracles,  in  mysteries,  and  in 
means  of  grace.  The  genuine  rationalism  of  all  this  is 
evident.  It  is  simply  a  clear  and  forceful  statement  of 
a  mild  and  lofty  type  of  eighteenth-century  Deism. 

Kant,  it  is  true,  was  much  more  than  a  rationalist. 
While  the  book  that  has  been  referred  to  was  little  else 
than  a  summary  of  positions  already  familiar,  in  other 
and  more  important  writings,  he  transcended  the  rational- 
ism of  his  day  and  opened  a  new  era  in  rehgious  as  well  as 
in  philosophical  thought.  This  side  of  his  work  and  its 
influence  upon  those  who  came  after  him  cannot  be  dealt 
with  here.  It  belongs  to  a  subsequent  volume  in  the 
series.  And  the  same  is  true  of  the  many  other  attempts 
at  religious  and  theological  reconstruction  which  began 
in  Kant's  day,  and  have  constituted  an  important  feature 
of  Protestant  thought  ever  since. 

While  the  rational  supematuralism  of  Tillotson  and 
others  hke  him  was  strong  during  the  first  half  of  the 
eighteenth  century  in  orthodox  Anglican  circles,  and  among 
the  clergy  of  the  Establishment,  its  influence  rapidly 
waned  during  the  latter  half  of  the  century,  and  Deism 
remained  throughout  a  proscribed  and  hated  thing.  In 
Germany,  on  the  other  hand,  not  only  supernatural 
rationalism,  but  rationalism  of  a  more  or  less  deistic  type, 
which  minimised  or  even  rejected  altogether  the  super- 
natural, was  strong  in  the  pulpits  and  theological  faculties 
at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth,  and  well  on  into  the  nine- 
teenth century.  It  was  later  in  making  its  appearance 
within  German  theological  circles,  but  it  lasted  longer, 


X.]  EATIONALISM  251 

and  in  its  extremer  form  got  a  much  firmer  hold  upon 
German  than  upon  English  Christianity.  In  England/-^ 
evangelicalism  followed  rationalism  and  crowded  it  off  the 
field.  In  Germany  rationalism  followed  pietism,  instead 
of  being  followed  by  it,  and  hence  its  development  went 
on  unchecked  for  a  much  longer  time.  It  is  no  accident 
that  German  theology  ever  since  the  latter  part  of  the 
eighteenth  century  has  been  much  more  rationalistic  than 
English,  although  the  rational  tendency  first  found  ex- 
pression on  a  large  scale  in  England,  not  in  Germany. 

IV.  In  America 

In  eighteenth-century  America,  Deism  found  but  rare 
literary  expression.^  Much  more  important  and  influen- 
tial was  the  rationalism  of  the  early  Unitarians,  but  they 
belonged  for  the  most  part  to  the  nineteenth  century,  and 
can  therefore  be  no  more  than  referred  to  here.  They 
were  not  primarily  interested,  as  is  often  supposed,  in  the 
person  of  Christ,  or  the  nature  of  the  Godhead,  but  in  the 
character  of  man.  It  was  against  the  doctrines  of  total 
depravity  and  unconditional  election,  emphasised  with 
so  tremendous  power  by  the  New  England  school  of 
theology,  that  they  revolted.  As  Channing  said  :  '  We 
consider  the  errors  which  relate  to  Christ's  person  as  of 
little  or  no  importance  compared  with  the  errors  of  those 
who  teach  that  God  brings  us  into  life  wholly  depraved  and 
wholly  helpless,  that  he  leaves  multitudes  w^ithout  that 
aid  which  is  indispensably  necessary  to  their  repentance, 
and  then  plunges  them  into  everlasting  burnings  and  un- 
speakable torture  for  not  repenting.'  ^ 

They  were  thus,  like  the  rationalists  in  general,  in  sym- 
pathy  with  the  spirit  of  the  modern  age,  and  humani- 
tarianism  was  a  passion  with  them.  They  were  devout 
supernaturalists,  accepting  as  loyally   as   the   Socinians 

1  For  instance  in  Ethan  Allen's  Reason  the  Only  Orade  of  Man,  1784. 
3  In  a  letter  to  the  Rev.  Samuel  C.  Thacher,  'written  in  1816;   quoted 
in  Channing'g  Memoir,  toI.  i.  p.  387. 


262  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT         [oh. 

the  inspiration  of  the  Bible ;  but  like  the  Socinians  they 
had  difficulties  with  the  traditional  doctrines  of  the  atone- 
ment, the  deity  of  Christ,  and  the  Trinity,  which  were 
historically  based  upon  the  beUef  in  human  depravity. 
Their  Christology,  to  be  sure,  was  commonly  Arian  rather 
than  Socinian,  but  in  the  main  they  stood  very  much 
upon  Socinian  ground,  though  their  imderlying  interest 
in  the  dignity  and  worth  of  man,  and  their  revolt  against 
the  traditional  notion  of  human  depravity,  were  even 
more  apparent  and  more  clearly  avowed.  This  was  not 
an  accident.  They  faced  one  of  the  extremest  forms  of 
Calvinism  the  world  has  seen,  the  theology  of  the 
Edwardean  school.  In  it  human  depravity  and  bondage 
were  emphasised  in  the  most  uncompromising  fashion, 
as  was  also  the  correlated  doctrine  of  unconditional  pre- 
destination. Humility  was  the  one  great  Christian 
virtue.  To  reahse  one's  lost  condition,  and  to  submit 
without  protest  or  question  to  the  decree  of  God,  even 
though  it  meant  eternal  damnation — this  was  the  first 
step  toward  salvation.  In  opposition  to  this  extreme 
type  of  Calvinism,  it  was  not  unnatural  that  men  of 
modern  sympathies  should  lay  emphasis  upon  the  dignity 
and  worth  of  man,  and  should  put  this  conception  in  the 
forefront  of  their  system.  What  was  often  only  tacit 
in  the  rationaUsm  of  Europe  was  here  given  the  most 
expHcit  utterance.  American  Unitarianism  is  thus  very 
instructive  to  the  student  of  modern  religious  thought. 
Its  kinship  with  the  rationaUsm  of  the  eighteenth  century 
in  general  is  apparent,  and  the  spirit  which  really  con- 
trolled the  whole  movement  here  comes  to  clearer  and 
more  unequivocal  expression  than  anywhere  else. 

Rationalism  appeared,  as  we  have  seen,  in  many  forms, 
sometimes  more  and  sometimes  less  radical.  But  it  is 
evident  that  the  principle  underlying  the  whole  movement, 
whether  in  England,  France,  Germany,  or  America,  was 


x]  RATIONALISM  £53 

antagonistic  to  the  traditional  Christian  system.  Where 
the  rationahstic  tendency  worked  itself  out  in  the  most 
thoroughgoing  way,  the  break  with  the  past  was  most 
complete.  That  in  many  cases  considerable  parts  of  the 
old  system  were  retained  meant  that  the  rationalistic 
principle  was  applied  only  in  a  half-hearted  or  inconsistent 
way.  That  a  system  founded  on  the  notion  of  the  blind- 
ness and  helplessness  of  the  natural  man  should  be  un- 
congenial to  one  who  exalted  the  moral  and  intellectual 
power  and  independence  of  humanity,  goes  without  say- 
ing. Two  opposing  principles  were  represented,  the  one 
by  the  traditional  system,  the  other  by  the  rationalism  of 
the  modem  age.  And  to  what  the  latter  led  when  it 
found  free  and  untrammelled  expression  was  seen  in  Deism, 
scepticism,  and  atheism.  The  eighteenth  century  was  not 
controliingly  atheistic,  or  even  deistic,  but  there  was  a 
strong  tendency  in  that  direction,  and  the  more  con- 
sistently the  spirit  of  the  century  voiced  itself,  the  more 
radical  was  the  result.  But  it  was  inevitable  that  radical- 
ism should  breed  reaction.  That  reaction  came  particu- 
larly in  English  evangelicalism,  which  has  already  been 
considered.  At  the  close  of  the  century  the  rehgious  crisis 
was  acute.  Either  a  mediaeval  man  and  a  Christian,  or 
a  modern  man  and  a  sceptic — this  seemed  the  sole  alterna- 
tive as  viewed  by  many  of  the  clearest-headed  thinkers 
of  the  day.^  It  is  true  that  the  great  mass  of  rationalists 
were  less  consistent  and  clear-sighted,  that  they  thought 
they  could  be  modern,  and  yet  retain,  not  all,  but  a  con- 
siderable part  of  the  traditional  system.  And  it  is  true 
that  multitudes  of  evangelicals  combined  with  their 
evangehcalism  features  of  systems  radically  opposed  to  it. 

1  It  may  not  be  out  of  place  to  remark  here  that  one  sees  in  this  connec- 
tion, with  uncommon  clearness,  the  vicious  consequence  of  univeraalising  an 
individual  experience.  Because  one  man  feels  his  need  of  divine  grace, 
therefore  all  men  must  need  it ;  or  because  one  man  feels  sufficient  unto 
himself,  therefore  all  men  are.  The  history  of  theology  is  full  of  this  kind 
of  thing,  and  many  of  the  most  serious  controversiea  and  misunderstandings 
have  resulted  from  it. 


254       PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT       [ch.  x. 

But  these  inconsistent  positions  should  not  blind  us  to 
the  significance  of  the  two  opposing  tendencies,  and  to 
the  seriousness  of  the  issue.  Mediaevalism  or  irreligion, 
this  was  the  alternative  offered  by  consistent  Evangelicals, 
and  accepted  by  consistent  rationalists.  It  is  the  alterna- 
tive still  offered  and  accepted  by  many  of  both  schools. 
But  in  the  meantime,  it  has  ceased  to  be  the  only  alterna- 
tive, for  toward  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  new 
influences  began  to  be  felt  which  have  completely  changed 
the  religious  situation.  New  conceptions  of  religion  have 
emerged  and  have  resulted  in  forms  of  Christianity  congenial 
to  the  temper  and  discoveries  of  the  modern  age,  so  that  it 
has  become  possible  for  a  man  to  be  fully  in  sympathy 
with  the  modem  spirit  and  yet  remain  a  Cliristian. 

When  Kant,  the  great  innovator,  began  his  epoch- 
making  labours  in  philosophy  and  reHgion,  pietism  and 
rationalism  were  the  two  great  forces  disputing  the  field 
throughout  the  larger  part  of  the  Protestant  world.  In 
England,  in  Germany,  and  in  America,  the  situation  was 
much  the  same,  though  here  the  one,  there  the  other, 
preponderated.  The  future  was  with  neither  of  them. 
Rationalism,  equally  with  pietism,  failed  to  meet  the 
developing  religious  needs  of  the  modern  world.  Both 
contributed  elements  of  permanent  value,  but  both  were 
proving  more  and  more  inadequate  and  unsatisfying 
to  religious  men  of  modern  sympathies.  That  the  effort 
should  be  made  to  transcend  them  was  inevitable.  The 
efforts  were  many.  By  Kant  himself,  by  Herder,  Jacobi, 
Hegel,  Schleiermacher,  Coleridge,  and  many  others,  re- 
constructions of  one  kind  and  another  were  attempted 
under  various  and  often  conflicting  influences.  All  these 
attempts  lie  beyond  the  horizon  of  the  present  volume. 
If  the  situation  at  the  time  they  began  has  besn  made  clear, 
at  least  one  of  the  aims  of  the  volume  has  been  realised. 


BIBLIOGEAPHY 

For  the  entire  history   of  Protestant  thought :  J.   A.  Domer, 

9escMchte  der  protestantischen  Theologu  (1867)  ;  Frank,  Geschichte 
der  protestantischen  Theologie  (1875) ;  A.  Dorner,  Grundriss  der 
Dogmengeschichte  (1899)  ;  Fisher,  History  of  Christian  Doctrine 
(1896)  ;  Allen,  Continuity  of  Christian  Thought  (1884) ;  Troeltsch, 
Frotestantisches  Christenthum  und  Kirche  (in  the  Kultur  der  Oegen- 
warty  i.  4,  1906). 


CHAPTER  I 

Harnack,  Lehrhuch  der  Dogmengeschichte,  vol.  iil  (Srd  ed.  1909, 
English  translation,  vols.  v.  sq.) ;  Loofs,  Leitfaden  zum  Studium  der 
Dogmengeschichte  (4th  ed.  1906) ;  Seeberg,  Lehrhuch  der  Dogmen- 
geschichte, vol.  ii.  (1898,  English  translation) ;  Schwane,  Dogmen- 
geschichte der  mittleren  Zeit  (1882)  ;  Kitschl,  Rechtfertigung  und 
Versohnnng,  vol  i  (4th  ed.  1903,  English  translation,  1872)  ; 
K.  Miiller,  Kirchengeschichte,  vol.  ii.  (1897  sq.) ;  Eicken,  Geschichte 
und  System  der  mittelalterlichen  Weltanschauung  (1887) ;  Janssen, 
Geschichte  des  deutschen  Volkes  seit  dem  Ausgang  des  Mittelalters, 
vol.  i.  (1883) ;  Michael,  Geschichte  des  deutschen  Volkes  seit  dem 
\Men  Jahrhundert  his  zum  Ausgang  des  Mittelalters  (1897-1906) ; 
Berger,  Die  Kulturaufgahen  der  Beformation  (1895).  An  excellent 
summary  of  conditions  on  the  eve  of  the  Eeformation,  with  copious 
references  to  the  sources  and  literature,  is  given  by  Lindsay,  History 
of  the  Beformation^  vol.  1.  book  i.  (1906). 


256  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT 

CHAPTER  n 

The  principal  editions  of  Luther's  works  are  the  Waleh,  1740  sq, 
in  twenty-four  volumes  (wholly  in  German)  ;  the  Erlangen,  1826  sq.j 
containing  the  German  works  in  sixty-seven  volumes,  and  the  Latin 
in  thirty- eight ;  and  the  Weimar ,  the  new  critical  edition,  in  process 
of  publication,  1883  sq.  The  best  editions  of  his  letters  are  by  De 
Wette,  1825  sq.,  in  six  volumes,  and  by  Enders  (supplement  to  the 
Erlangen  edition)  1884  sq.,  in  process  of  publication.  A  number  of 
Luther's  works  have  been  translated  into  English.  Since  1903  a 
general  translation  has  been  in  process  of  publication  under  the 
editorship  of  J.  N.  Lanker.  The  references  to  Luther's  works  in 
chapter  ii.  are  to  the  Erlangen  edition  of  the  German  works,  unless 
otherwise  stated. 

On  Luther's  thought :  The  Histories  of  Doctrine,  by  A.  Harnack, 
Loofs,  and  Seeberg  ;  Ritschl,  Rechtfertigung  und  Versbhnung,  vol.  i.  ; 
Tschackert,  Die  Enfstehung  der  hdherischen-  und  der  reformirten 
Kirckenlehre  (1910) ;  Koestlin,  Luthers  Theologie  in  Hirer  geschicht- 
lichen  EntwicJcelung  und  ihrem  iniuren  Zusammenhange  (2nd  ed. 
1883,  English  translation,  1897)  ;  Theodosius  Harnack,  Imthers 
Theologie  mit  besonderer  Beziehung  auf  seine  Versohnungs-  und 
Erldsungslehre  (1862  sq.)  ;  Hermann,  Der  Verkehr  des  Christ-en  mit 
Gott  (3rd  ed.  1896,  English  translation,  1895) ;  Thieme,  Die  Sittliche 
Triebkraft  des  Glaubens  ;  eine  Untersuchung  zur  Lutlier's  Theologie 
(1 895)  ;  Denifle,  Luther  und  Lutherthum  in  der  ersten  EntmicJcelung 
(1904  sq.)  ;  Weiss,  Didherpsychologie  als  Schlilssel  zur  LiUherlegende 
(Ergdnzungshand  zu  Denijles  Luther,  1906). 


CHAPTER  III 

Zwingli's  ▼orks  have  been  edited  by  Schuler  and  Schulthess, 
1828  sq.  in  eight  volumes.  The  references  in  chapter  iii.  are  to  this 
edition.  A  new  edition  in  the  Corpus  Reformatorum,  voL  88  sq. 
is  in  process  of  publication  (1905  sq.).  An  English  translation  of  a 
few  of  his  tracts  is  given  in  Jackson's  Selected  Works  of  Huldreich 
Zwingli  (1901). 

On  his  thought :  Loofs,  Dogmengeschichte  ;  Seeberg,  Dogmen- 
geschichte  ;  Tschackert,  Die  Entstehung  der  lutherischen-  und  der 
reformirten  Kirckenlehre ;  Schweizer,  Die  protestantischen  Central' 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  267 

dogmen  in  ihrer  Eniwickelung  innerhaXb  der  reformirten  Kirche, 
Tol.    i.    (1854) ;    Zeller,  Das  theologische  System  Zvdnglis  (1853) 
Siegwart,   Ulrkh  Zwingli :  der  Character  seiner  Theologie   (1855) 
A.  Baur,  Zwinglis  Theologie,  ihr  Werden  und  ihr  System  (1885  sq.) 
Stahelin,   Huldreich   Zwingli,   sein  Lehen  und   WerJcen   nach   den 
Quellen  dargesUllt  (1895  sg'.);  Jackson,  Huldreich  Zwingli  (Heroes 
of  the  Refonnation  Series,  1901). 


CHAPTER  IV 

Melanchthon's  works  are  published  iu  the  Corpus  Reformaiorum, 
Tols.  i.-xxviii,  (1834  sq.). 

On  his  thought :  Loofs,  Dogmengeschichte ;  Seeberg,  Dogmen- 
geschichte ;  Galle,  Versuch  einer  Charakteristik  Melanchthons  als 
Theologen  (1840) ;  Herrlinger,  Die  Theologie  Melanchthons  in  ihrer 
geschichtlichen  Entwickelung  (1879) ;  Hartfelder,  Philipp  Melanchthon 
als  Praeceptor  Germaniae  (1889) ;  Troeltsch,  Vernunft  und  Offen- 
harung  bei  Johann  Gerhard  und  Melanchthon  (1891) ;  Richard, 
Philip  Melanchthon  (Heroes  of  the  Reformation  Series,  18d8). 


CHAPTER  V 

Calvin's  works  are  published  in  the  Corpus  Beformatorumt 
vols,  xxix.-lxxxvii.  (1863  sq.).  A  considerable  part  in  English  trans- 
lation by  the  Calvin  Translation  Society  in  fifty-two  volumes 
(1843  sq.).  Letters  in  Herminyard,  Correspovdanct  des  Beforma- 
teurs  dans  hs  pays  de  langue  frangaise  (1878  sq.). 

On  Calvin's  thought :  Loofs,  Dogmengeschichte  ;  Seeberg,  Dogmen- 
geschichte ;  Ritschl,  Bechtfertigung  und  Versbhnung^  vol.i. ;  Tschackert, 
Entstehung  der  lutherischen-  und  der  reformirten  Kirchenlehre ; 
Schweizer,  Die  protestantischen  CeniraJdogmen ;  Kampschulte, 
Johannes  Calvin,  seine  Kirche  und  sein  Stout  in  Genf  (1869  sq.) ; 
Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  les  hommes  et  les  choses  de  son  temps  (1899 
sq.) ;  Lobstein,  Die  Ethik  Calvins  (1877) ;  Scheibe,  Calvins  Prae- 
destinatiomlehre  (1897) ;  Fairbaim,  '  Calvin  and  the  Reformed 
Church '  {Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  ii.,  1904) ;  Walker,  John 
Calvin  (Heroes  of  the  Reformation  Series,  1906). 

R 


258  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT 


CHAPTER  VI 


Ritschl,  Geschichte  des  Fietismus,  vol.  i  (1880) ;  Keller,  Geschichte 
der  Wiedertdufer  (1880) ;  Die  Reformation  und  die  dltern  Reform- 
parteien  (1885) ;  Heath,  Anabaptism  from  its  Rise  at  Zwickau  to 
its  Fall  at  Milnster  (1895)  ;  Newman,  History  of  Anti-Pedobaptism 
(1897)  ;  Belfort  Bax,  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Anabaptists  (1903) ; 
Vedder,  Balthazar  Hilbmaier  (Heroes  of  the  Reformation  Series, 
1905) ;  Lindsay,  History  of  the  Reformation,  vol.  ii.  book  v.  chap.  IL 
(1907),  for  bibliography  of   the  numerous    and  widely  scattered 


II 

Bihliotheca  Frairum  Polonorvm  {1656  sq.) ;  Trechsel,  Die  protes- 
t^intischen  Antitrinitarier  vor  Faustus  Socinns  (1839  sq.) ;  Fock, 
Der  Socinianismus  nach  seiner  Stellung  in  der  Gesammtentwickelung 
des  chrisUichen  Geistes,  etc.  (1847) ;  Ritschl,  Rechtfertigung  und 
Versohnung,  vol.  i. ;  Harnack,  DogmengeschichUf  voL  iii.  (English 
translation,  toL  yii). 


CHAPTER  VII 

"Writings  of  English  Divines,  published  by  the  Parker  Society : 
Dixon,  History  of  the  Church  of  England  from  the  Abolition  of  the 
Roman  Jurisdiction  (1878  sq.) ;  Gairdner,  The  English  Church  in 
the  Sixteenth  Century  (1904) ;  Frere,  TJie  English  Church  in  the 
Reigns  of  Elizabeth  and  James  (1904) ;  Pollard,  Thomas  Cranmer 
(Heroes  of  the  Reformation  Series,  1904) ;  Hardwick,  A  History  of 
the  Articles  of  Religion  (3rd  ed.,  1876) ;  Tomlinson,  The  Prayer 
Book,  Articles  and  Homilies  (1897)  ;  Makower,  Constitutional 
History  of  the  Church  of  England  {] 895) ;  Neal,  Hist&ry  of  tlie 
Puritans  (1754) ;  Barclay,  Inner  Life  of  the  Religious  Societies  of 
the  Commonwealth  (1876). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  269 


CHAPTER  Vni 

Tholuck,  Vorgeschtchte  des  Ratuynalismus  (1853) ;  Schweizer,  Die 
protestantischen  Centraldogmen ;  Gass,  Geschichte  der  protestantischen 
Dogmatik  (1854)  ;  Krauth,  The  Conservative  Reformation  and  its 
Theology  (1872) ;  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christendom,  vol  i.  (1877)  ; 
0.  Ritschl,  Dogmengeschichte  des  Frotestantismus  (vol.  i.  1908) ; 
Tschackert,  Entstehung  der  lutherischen-  und  der  reformirten 
Kirchenlehre. 


CHAPTER  IX 

I 

Tholuck,  DcM  hirchliche  Lehen  des  17ten  Jahrhnnderts  (1861  sq.) ; 
Geschichte  des  Rationalismus,  part  L  (1865) ;  H.  Schmid,  Geschichte 
des  Pietismus  (1863) ;  Ritschl,  Geschichte  des  Pietismus  (1880  sq.) ; 
Sachs><e,  Ursprung  -und  Wesen  des  Pietismus  (1884) ;  Hiibener,  Der 
Pietismus  geschichtlich  und  dogmatisch  beleuchtet  (1901) ;  Griinberg, 
Philipp  Jakob  Spener  (1893  sq.). 


II 

G.  Smith,  History  of  Wesleyan  Methodism  (1757  sq,) ;  Stevens, 
History  of  the  Religious  Movement  of  the  Eighteenth  Century,  called 
Methodism  (1858  sq.)  ;  Abbey  and  Overton,  The  English  Church  in 
the  Eighteenth  Century  (1878)  ;  Lecky,  History  of  England  in  the 
Eighteenth  Century,  vol.  ii.  (1888) ;  Tyerman,  Life  and  Times  of  the 
Reverend  John  Wesley  (1870  sq.)  ;  The  Oxford  Methodists  (1873) ; 
Julia  Wedgworth,  John  Wesley  and  the  Evangelical  Reaction  of  the 
Eighteenth  Century  (1870) ;  Rigg,  The  Churchmanship  of  John 
Wesley,  etc.  (1879)  j  The  Living  Wesley  (1891) ;  A  New  History  of 
Methodism,  edited  by  Townsend,  Workman,  and  Eayrs  (1909). 

Ill 

Allen,  Jonathan  Edwards  (1889) ;  Foster,  A  Genetic  History  of 
the  New  England  Theology  (1907)  ;  Riley,  History  of  American 
Philosophy,  The  Early  Schools  (1907) ;  Wendell,  A  Literary  History 
of  America  (1900). 


SOO  PROTESTANT  THOUGHT  BEFORE  KANT 


CHAPTER  X 

Noaek,  Freidenker  in  der  Religion  (1853  sq.)  ;  Draper,  History  of 
the  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe  (1864) ;  Lecky,  History  of  the 
Rise  cmd  Influence  of  the  Spirit  of  Rationalism  in  Europe  (1865) ; 
Pfleiderer,  Geschichte  der  Religionsphilosophie  (1893)  ;  Piinjer, 
Geschiehte  der  chrisUichen  Religionsphilosophie  (1880-83,  English 
Translation,  1887) ;  K.  Fischer's  and  Hoffding's  Histories  of  Modern 
Philosophy  ;  Hettner,  Litter atur geschichte  des  ISten  Jahrhunderts 
(1874  sq.) ;  Robertson,  A  Short  History  of  Free  Thought,  Ancient 
and  Modtm  (second  edition  greatly  enlarged,  1906). 


Tulloch,  Rational  Theology  in  Englcmd  in  the  Seventeenth  Century 
(1872) ;  Hunt,  Religious  Thought  in  England  in  the  Seventeen^ 
Centu/ry  (1870) ;  Leland,  A  View  of  the  Principal  Deistical  Writers 
that  have  appeared  in  England  in  the  Last  cmd  Present  Century 
(1754  sq.)  ;  Lechler,  Geschichte  des  englischen  Deismus  (1841) ;  Mark 
Pattison,  Tendencies  of  Religious  Thought  in  England,  1688-1750  (in 
Essays  and  Reviews,  1860) ;  A.  S.  Farrar,  Critical  History  of  Free 
Thought  (1862) ;  Leslie  Stephen,  History  of  English  Thought  in  the 
Eighteenth  Century  (1876) ;  Carrau,  La  Philosophic  Religieuse  en 
Angleterre  (1888) ;  Benn,  The  History  of  English  Rationalism  in  the 
Nineteenih  Centuryy  vol  I  (1906). 


Bartholin^,  Histoire  des  doctrines  religieuses  modemes  (1855) ; 
Damiron,  Memoires  pour  servir  a  Vhistoire  de  la  philosophie  au 
\%hme  sUde  (1857  sq.) ;  Lanfrey,  VEglise  et  les  Philosophes  au 
IQerru  Silde  (1857) ;  Faguet,  Le  18em«  Siecle  (1890) ;  Picaret,  Les 
Idiologues  (1891) ;  Texte,  Rousseau  et  les  Origines  du  cosmopolitisms 
litUrairi  (1896) ;  Morlty,  Voltaire  (1886) ;  Rousseau  (1878.) 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  261 


in 

Saintes,  Histoire  critique  du  rationalisme  en  Allemagne  (1841) ; 
B.  Bauer,  Geschichte  der  PoUtik,  Kultur  und  Aufkldrung  des  18fen 
Jahrhunderts  (1843  sq,)  ;  Hagenbach,  German  Rationalism  (1865)  ; 
J.  Schmidt,  Geschichte  des  geistigen  Lehens  in  Deutschland,  1687 
bis  1781  (1862  sq.) ;  Kohn,  Aufkldrung speriode  (1873) ;  Kahnis, 
Der  innere  Gang  des  deutschen  Protestantismus  (1874) ;  Oncken, 
Zeitalter  Friedrichs  des  Grossen  (1881). 


Ellis,  A  Half  Century  of  the  Unitarian  Controversy  (1858) ;  Allen, 
Our  Liberal  Movement  in  Theology  (1892) ;  A  History  of  the 
Unitarians  (American  Church  History  Series,  1894) ;  Cooke, 
Unitarianism  in  America  (1902);  Foster,  Genetic  History  of  the 
New  Ermla/nd  Theology  (1907). 


Studies  in  Theology 

A  New  Series  of  Hand-books,  being  aids  to  interpretation 

in   Biblical    Criticism   for   the    use    of    Ministers, 

Theological  Students  and  general  readers. 


12mo,  cloth,     75  cents  net  per  volume. 

THE  aim  of  the  series  is  described  by  the  general  title. 
It  is  an  attempt  to  bring  all  the  resources  of  modern 
learning  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures,  and 
to  place  within  the  reach  of  all  who  are  interested 
the  broad  conclusions  arrived  at  by  men  of  distinction  in  the 
world  of  Christian  scholarship  on  the  great  problems  of  Faith 
and  Destiny.  The  volumes  are  critical  and  constructive,  and 
their  value  can  scarcely  be  overstated.  Each  volume  will 
contain  bibliographies  for  the  guidance  of  those  who  wish  to 
oursue  more  extended  studies. 

The  writers  selected  for  the  various  volumes  are  represen- 
tative scholars  both  in  this  country  and  in  Europe.  Each  of 
them  has  been  assigned  a  subject  with  which  he  is  particularly 
qualified  to  deal,  as  will  be  at  once  apparent  even  in  this 
preliminary  announcement  giving  a  list  of  some  of  the  vol- 
umes in  preparation. 

ARRANGEMENT  OF  VOLUMES 

A  CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

By  Arthur  Samuel  Peake,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Biblical  Exegesis 
and  Dean  of  the  Faculty  of  Theology,  Victoria  University,  Man- 
Chester.  Sometime  Fellow  of  Merton  College,  Oxford.  Author  of 
"A  Guide  to  Biblical  Study,"  "  The  Problem  of  Suffering  in  the 
Old  Testament,"  etc.  [Ready. 

FAITH  AND  ITS  PSYCHOLOGY.  By  the  Rev.  William  R.  Inge, 
D.D.,  Lady  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity,  Cambridge,  and 
Bampton  Lecturer,  Oxford,  1899.  Author  of  "  Studies  of  the 
English  Mystics,"  "  Truth  and  Falsehood  in  Religion,"  "  Personal 
Idealism  and  Mysticism,"  etc.  [Ready. 

PHILOSOPHY  AND  RELIGION.  By  the  Rev.  Hastings  Rash- 
DALL,  D.Litt.  (Oxon.),  D.C.L.  (Dunelm),  F.B.A.  Fellow  and 
Tutor  of  New  College,  Oxford.  Author  of  "  The^Theory  of  Good 
and  Evil,"  etc.,  etc.  [Ready. 


REVELATION  AND  INSPIRATION.  By  the  Rev.  James  Orr, 
D.D.,  Professor  of  Apologetics  in  the  Theological  College  of  the 
United  Free  Church,  Glasgow.  Author  of  "  The  Christian  View 
of  God  and  the  World,"  "  The  Ritschlian  Theology  and  Evangelical 
Faith,"  "The  Problem  of  the  Old  Testament,"  etc.  [Ready, 

CHRISTIANITY  AND  SOCIAL  QUESTIONS.  By  the  Rev.  Will- 
iam Cunningham,  D.D.,  F.B.A.,  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  Cam- 
bridge. Hon.  Fellow  of  Gonville  and  Caius  College,  Cambridge. 
Archdeacon  of  Ely.  Formerly  Lecturer  on  Economic  History  to 
Harvard  University.  Author  of  "  Growth  of  EngUsh  History  and 
Commerce,"  etc.  [Ready. 

CHRISTIAN    THOUGHT    TO    THE    REFORMATION.      By 

Herbert  B.  Workman,  D.Litt.,  Principal  of  the  Westminster  Train- 
ing College.  Author  of  "The  Church  of  the  West  in  the  Middle 
Ages,"  "The  Dawn  of  the  Reformation,"  etc.  [Ready, 

PROTESTANT    THOUGHT    BEFORE     KANT.       By    A.    C. 

McGiEFERT,  Ph.D.,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Church  History  in  the 
Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York.  Author  of  "The  His- 
tory of  Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age"  and  "The  Apostles* 
Creed."  [Ready, 

THE  CHRISTIAN  HOPE:  A  STUDY  IN  THE  DOCTRINE 
OF  IMMORTALITY.  By  William  Adams  Brown,  Ph.D.,  D.D., 
Professor  of  Systematic  Theology  in  the  Union  Theological  Semi- 
nary, New  York.  Author  of  "The  Essence  of  Christianity"  and 
"  Christian  Theology  in  Outline."  [Ready. 

HISTORY  OF  CHRISTIAN  THOUGHT  SINCE  KANT.    By 

the  Rev.  Edward  Caldwell  Moore,  D.D.,  Parkman  Professor  of 
Theology  in  Harvard  University.  Author  of  "The  New  Testa- 
ment in  the  Christian  Church,"  etc.  [Ready. 

THE  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  By  the  Rev.  James 
Moffatt,  D.D.,  D.Litt.,  Yates  Professor  of  New  Testament  Greek 
and  Exegesis,  Mansfield  College,  Oxford.  [Ready. 

THE  TEXT  AND  CANON  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  By 

Alexander  Souter,  D.Litt.  [Ready. 

A  HANDBOOK  OF  CHRISTIAN  APOLOGETICS.  By  Alfred 
Ernest  Garvie,  M.A.,  D.D.  [Ready. 

GOSPEL  ORIGINS.    By  the  Rev.  William  West  Holdsworth,  M.A. 

Other  volumes  are  in  preparation  and  will  be  announced  later. 


\   UNP  HRSITY   LIBRA? 

-  "ted  be^cn- 


958.1 


e.  3 


s»"°* 


